We carried out this review as there had been a safeguarding investigation alleging that one person had not received appropriate care and support and that care records did not evidence and support the care they needed. This was investigated by the adult protection team at Worcestershire County Council and the allegations were found to be true. When we visited the service we spoke with people who use the service in all five units of the home. We asked people about their experience of the care and one person told us it was 'reasonable', but could be improved by 'getting more staff'. People told us they had 'no complaints at all about this place', 'they are a decent crowd here ' food quite good really, can't grumble'.
In the main, we saw that staff interacted with people in a friendly, courteous and respectful manner, although we did observe staff addressing people as 'darling', 'love' and 'babe', which people may not be happy being called. We asked one person if they liked being called 'darling' and they told us 'they use this a lot, I never answer to 'darling' as I do not like this'. People told us the staff 'look after her now and are kinder than they have ever been. So it's getting better ' but it's slow'. Another person told us 'some are very good, lovely, but would not say that with everybody, it varies'. They told us when staff were speaking to them that you were 'not able to hear the last bit of the conversation as they don't wait until you have finished speaking, they rush off'. We observed this happen at the time of our visit. One person told us they wanted staff to respect their choice, and opinion, but didn't feel staff did this. They told us staff 'don't have time and they don't listen. Some are not interested'. People told us 'the cleaners work hard ' they have to do a lot. My room is clean and tidy but I always make my bed'.
One person told us 'the food is a little better ' no flavour to the meat'. They told us they had 'ordered lamb chops for lunch'. They told us they did not get the lamb chops, they got 'some bitty bits of lamb ' not very nice'. Another person told us they were 'usually' given a choice of food, but the choice was 'rather the same'. They told us they did not like the food now, they said they 'used to look forward to it, not now'. They told us the 'meat was not good. The knives were blunt; it takes me half an hour to cut the meat up, so I give up'. We saw staff offering people a drink mid-morning. In the lounge area on some units there was fruit available and a jug of squash with glasses for people to help themselves. The week's menu was on display in the entrance to the home, the typeface was too small for people to read if they had poor sight.
The home had some pet guinea pigs and cats. People told us they held the guinea pigs and helped to feed them.
We found that there was a strong smell of urine, which permeated throughout the home. This could place people at risk of cross infection, as it indicates that urine is not cleaned up in a timely manner. This is also unpleasant for the people who live at the home and indicated that the home was not managing people's incontinence correctly.
We looked at the care records for two people who lived at the home and found there was missing information and the care records were not up to date. This means people may not receive their care in a consistent manner.
We found that the home was not managing people's medication effectively and safely, as one person had not received their prescribed medication for a period of two days.