Shropshire care home placed in 'special measures' and given six months to improve

A care provider in Shropshire has been placed in special measures after it was rated 'inadequate' in the latest CQC report.

Keegan's Court Residential Care Home. Photo: Google
Keegan's Court Residential Care Home. Photo: Google

The latest Care Quality Commission (CQC) report includes inspections of adult social care, and primary medical care.

The inspections include ratings which show the CQC's overall judgement of the quality of care, and from highest to lowest marks they can include outstanding, good, requires improvement and inadequate.

Five points are assessed and these are whether the places of care are safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

Three Shropshire based care providers were included in the latest CQC report, with one rated as 'inadequate' and two others rated as 'requires improvement'.

The care provider that has been rated inadequate and been placed into special measures is Keegan's Court Residential Care Home, which is based on The Grange, Kerry Lane, Bishops Castle, Shropshire, SY9 5AU.

Keegan’s Court Residential Care Home can accommodate a maximum of 19 people, and states it provides care for adults over 65-years-old.

The CQC states that the inspection was carried out on July 20, and the full report has now been released.

The inspection states the following:

  • Keegan’s Court Residential Care Home is a care home providing support with personal care to 15 people at the time of this inspection, some of whom were living with dementia. The home can accommodate a maximum of 19 older people. Accommodation is provided in an adapted building providing 15 beds in the main building and two bungalows, each providing two beds.

  • People were not always treated with dignity or respect. Confidential information was not secured and was accessible to those without authority.

  • People were not safe as the provider failed to ensure the physical environment was safely maintained and systems and processes were not effectively followed. Including, but not limited to, ineffective fire safety systems, unsafe storage of chemicals and lack of identification of risks with associated with windows and the pond area.

  • People were not always protected from the risks of abuse. People did not always receive their medicines safely or as prescribed.

  • The provider did not effectively analyse significant incidents to learn from them and to make changes to improve people’s safety. The providers infection prevention and control procedures were not effectively followed.

  • The provider did not have effective quality monitoring procedures in place to drive improvements in the care they provided. The management team did not have clearly defined roles and responsibilities.

  • People were not always supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. Staff did not always support them in the least restrictive way possible or in their best interests; the application of policies and systems in the service did not always support best practice.

  • The provider followed safe recruitment practices.

  • The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 25 February 2022).

  • At that inspection there were breaches of regulation regarding safe care and treatment and how the location was managed. Following that inspection, the provider was issued with warning notices.

  • We undertook a targeted inspection on 12 April 2022 to check they had complied with the warning notice. We use targeted inspections to follow up on Warning Notices or to check concerns. They do not look at an entire key question, only the part of the key question we are specifically concerned about. Targeted inspections do not change the rating from the previous inspection. This is because they do not assess all areas of a key question. Following the targeted inspection, we confirmed the provider was meeting the legal requirements and the conditions of the warning notice.

  • The inspection was prompted by concerns about the management of the location. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks.

  • We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

  • We have found evidence the provider needs to make improvements.

  • We are mindful of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our regulatory function. This meant we took account of the exceptional circumstances arising as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic when considering what enforcement action was necessary and proportionate to keep people safe as a result of this inspection. We will continue to monitor the service and will take further action if needed.

  • We have identified breaches in relation to keeping people safe, dignity and overall governance.

  • The overall rating for this service is ‘Inadequate’ and the service is therefore in ‘special measures’. This means we will keep the service under review and, if we do not propose to cancel the provider’s registration, we will re-inspect within 6 months to check for significant improvements.

  • If the provider has not made enough improvement within this timeframe. And there is still a rating of inadequate for any key question or overall rating, we will take action in line with our enforcement procedures. This will mean we will begin the process of preventing the provider from operating this service. This will usually lead to cancellation of their registration or to varying the conditions the registration.

  • For adult social care services, the maximum time for being in special measures will usually be no more than 12 months. If the service has demonstrated improvements when we inspect it. And it is no longer rated as inadequate for any of the five key questions it will no longer be in special measures.

The full inspection report is available to the public at

Alma, Office manager of the care home, said: "We are going to appeal the rating by CQC. We are in the process of formulating representation.

"We already started the action plan and in fact some of the plan has been put into effect."

The two other care providers that were inspected in the latest ratings are rated as 'require improvement' were:

  • Highbury House, 36 Aston Road, Wem, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, SY4 5BA - It was rated as 'requires improvement' in all five categories inspected, which are, 'safe', 'effective', 'caring', 'responsive', and 'well-led'.

  • Riverside Medical Practice, Barker Street, Shrewsbury, SY1 1QJ - It was rated as 'requires improvement' in two of the five categories and good for three. It was rated requires improvement for 'safe', 'effective, and was rated good in 'caring', 'responsive', and 'well-led'.

Sorry, we are not accepting comments on this article.

Top Stories

More from the Shropshire Star

UK & International News