The Care Quality Commission has today published the report of its inspection of Merok Park Nursing Home in Banstead, Surrey. Following enforcement action by CQC, the home closed on the 9th of December and the people who were living there have moved to other accommodation.
The report sets out CQC’s findings on the service provided by Mr & Mrs S Cooppen during 2 unannounced inspections and 3 other visits during November and December 2014. Inspectors concluded that the provider was failing to provide care which was safe, effective, caring, responsive or well led. Overall Merok Park Nursing Home was rated as Inadequate. The full report of this inspection is available on the CQC website today: (http://www.cqc.org.uk/location/1-150028960) The report identifies a number of areas of concern which led to the decision to urgently remove the provider’s registration for this home. • There were not enough staff on duty and at times, there had been only one nurse on duty to look after 27 people. • Staff regularly worked over 50 hours a week. Some staff worked as many as 84 hours a week. • The staff failed to notice when some people did not eat their lunch. • Inspectors observed staff being rough with people and ignoring people who were in distress. • There was mould on walls, broken taps, stained carpets and only cold or tepid water coming from the taps in some people’s rooms. People washed in cold water. • Inspectors noted that the smell of urine was overpowering in the home. • Staff (including the cleaner) had not had infection control training. Soiled clinical waste was left in open bags in a bathroom and the outside clinical waste bin was unlocked which was a serious infection control risk. • The two sluice rooms were not fit for purpose. A cleaner was seen to give a quick rinse to a commode in the basin of a toilet. • The home was dirty. Some bathrooms had run out of hand wash and inspectors saw stained toilets, toilet seats and dirty toilet brushes. • Not all staff had received a criminal records check and here was no evidence that all nurses were registered with the Nursing and Midwifery Council.
At the time of the inspection, inspectors raised their immediate concerns with the provider. When no improvement was seen, CQC took action to protect residents from further harm by urgently cancelling the provider’s registration. Adrian Hughes, Deputy Chief Inspector of Adult Social Care for CQC, said: ‘‘Inspectors found that Mr and Mrs S Cooppen had allowed the home to deteriorate to such an extent that people were exposed to risk of harm. When the concerns were brought to the provider’s attention they failed to take action to improve the situation. The environmental and staffing issues could have been quickly remedied but the providers were unwilling or unable to take the necessary action. ‘It is simply unacceptable for people to be washed in cold water, this does not promote or protect their dignity. When people using care services rely on others for support to eat, that support must be there and provided in a kind, compassionate and dignified way. To allow the smell of urine in the home to become so overwhelming was symptomatic of the provider’s inability to monitor the quality of the care and take action when needed. The provision of a working lift is essential not just to help with mobility and transportation around the home, but it should also provide opportunities for them to mix with others and become involved in activities around the home. ‘Staff from CQC, the council and clinical commissioning group visited the home every day until the day of the transfer on Tuesday 9 December. Alternative accommodation was found for all residents and arrangements were made. On the day of the transfer, the ambulances did not arrive on time which meant that residents were delayed in leaving the home into the evening. We are sorry for the distress this caused to those living at the home and their relatives. We do not take decisions like this lightly and no doubt the delay made a distressing time for the residents worse but leaving them in such an appalling care home would have meant exposing them at even greater risk.’