Archived: Mulberry Manor Care Home

Updated 2 March 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection was unannounced, which meant that the home’s management, staff and people using the service did not know the inspection was going to take place. The inspection visit was carried out on 28 January 2016, and was undertaken by an adult social care inspector.

During the inspection we spoke with staff, the home’s manager, and a senior manager. We also spoke with five people who were using the service at the time of the inspection. We checked people’s personal records and records relating to the management of the home. We looked at team meeting minutes, training records, medication records and records of quality and monitoring audits.

We observed care taking place in the home, and observed staff undertaking various activities, including handling medication, supporting people to eat and using specific pieces of equipment to support people’s mobility. In addition to this, we undertook a Short Observation Framework for Inspection (SOFI) SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Prior to the inspection, we reviewed records we hold about the provider and the location, including notifications that the provider had submitted to us, as required by law, to tell us about certain incidents within the home.

Updated 2 March 2016

The inspection was unannounced, and was carried out on 28 January 2016. The provider registered this location earlier in the year and therefore this was the location’s first inspection. The location was previously operated by another provider within the same corporate structure, and at its last inspection in January 2015 was rated as “Good.”

Mulberry Manor is a 49 bed nursing home, providing care to older adults with a range of support and care needs. At the time of the inspection there were 24 people using the service.

Mulberry Manor is in the suburb of Swinton in Rotherham, South Yorkshire. It is in its own grounds in a quiet, residential area, but close to public transport links and the town centre. The home is a purpose –built building operating over two floors, although when the home was inspected the top floor was not in use.

At the time of the inspection, there was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons.’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff were extremely caring and undertook their duties in a person-centred and patient manner. However, there were not enough staff to meet people’s needs, and this meant that at times people had to wait for support when they needed it.

Staff had a good knowledge of people and their needs. Staff could describe people's preferences, their backgrounds and life histories, as well as how to support people to keep them safe and provide the care they required.

We found that although there was a comprehensive training programme, it had not yet been embedded into practice and therefore staff had not received adequate training to undertake their roles. Many staff had not received training in relation to recognising and acting on abuse, or in the Mental Capacity Act and ensuring appropriate arrangements in relation to consent are followed.

The provider had failed to make several, legally required, notifications to CQC. These related to safeguarding incidents and the absence of the registered manager. The registered manager was unfamiliar with some of these requirements.

The provider’s system for auditing the service was not fit for purpose, as it had failed to identify or address shortfalls in the service, such as errors and omissions in care plans and legal requirements not being adhered to.