St Mark's Care Home

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment, we rated this key question good. At this assessment, the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe, and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed. The service was in breach of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, the management of people’s medicines, and recruitment.

Effective – this means we sought evidence that people’s care, treatment, and support resulted in good outcomes and promoted a high quality of life, based on the best available evidence. At our last assessment, we rated this key question good. At this assessment, the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment, and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent. The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to consent.

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last assessment, we rated this key question outstanding. At this assessment, the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.At our last assessment, we rated this key question outstanding. At this assessment, the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment, we rated this key question outstanding. At this assessment, the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership were inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care. The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance.