Doncaster care home branded 'inadequate' for third time in a row

A Doncaster care home has been criticised following an inspection by a Government health watchdog for the third time in a row.

Monday, 20th February 2017, 12:38 pm
Updated Wednesday, 1st March 2017, 8:44 am
Victoria Lodge Residential Care Home. Picture: Dean Atkins/Doncaster Free Press

Victoria Lodge Residential Care Home on Thorne Road in Edenthorpe, was placed into special measures after it was rated 'inadequate' by the Care Quality Commission.

The management and the effectiveness of the home was rated the lowest score possible. Three further areas of inspection were told they must make improvements.

The home was also labelled 'inadequate' on two previous inspections in February and August last year.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

But care home denied the home fell below required standards and said they would be challenging the CQC's findings which was 'factually incorrect'.

Read the full report hereInspectors found six breaches of the Health & Social Care Act 2008 in relation to safety, care records, dietary requirements, food storage and regulation.

The report said staff appeared to know people and their needs and preferences well, but 'failed to ensure people's dignity and privacy' was always upheld.

Peope told inspectors they enjoyed the food at the home, but officials found food was 'not served or stored safely', and people's needs in relation to food were 'not always met'.

At one meal time, inspectors found care home staff didn't think one resident was 'really vegetarian' and 'they chose what they wanted'.

One of the day's options was liver in gravy with potatoes and vegetables, and that the person would therefore have the gravy with the liver removed from it. The report said staff considered this constituted a 'vegetarian meal'.

Inspectors also found the home's manager was not registered with the CQC despite assurances this process would be completed.

The report added: "Since the inspection of July 2016, the provider and home's manager gave CQC assurances that they were taking steps to achieve and sustain improvements to the service. As part of this assurance they supplied action plans and self assessments to CQC with updates on their progress. We contrasted the latest update document with our findings of the December inspection. We concluded that the provider and home's manager were failing to recognise the home's poor performance."

A CQC spokesman said: "We have placed the service into special measures. Services in special measures will be kept under review and, if we have not taken immediate action to propose to cancel the provider's registration of the service, will be inspected again within six months. The expectation is that providers found to have been providing inadequate care should have made significant improvements within this time frame."

A spokesman for Victoria Lodge said: "We do not agree with the contents of the report and in particular, refute some of the allegations that are factually inaccurate. This is not a difference of opinion, aspects of the observations and allegations are factually incorrect. These have been brought to the attention of CQC and we are awaiting their response.

"The welfare and care of the residents in the home are paramount to us. Some of the residents have been at the home for some years and their relatives have never sought to remove the family member from the home. This we would suggest speaks volumes as to the quality of the care and service provided."