The owner of a West Norfolk care home has defended its reputation after inspectors said it had failed to meet essential quality and safety standards.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) took enforcement action against the Lincoln Lodge residential home in Hunstanton in order to “protect the health, safety and welfare of people using the service”.
But owner Brian Poore claimed the report, which had ordered improvements, was unfair, and was now damaging his business.
He said that the new systems and procedures which the inspectors had called for following their visit in the spring had already been put in place by the time their findings came to light.
He said yesterday: “The report does not reflect the present situation and the inspector is aware of this.
“We feel their report is now damaging 27 years of good reputation. It is also unsettling to residents and their families.”
He added that one family had declined to use the home because of the report’s findings.
Following an inspection in April, the CQC concluded that the Lincoln Square home must improve in order to “protect the health, safety and welfare of people” using its services.
The inspectors said the home failed to protect people against the risks of unsafe care and treatment by not effectively assessing and monitoring the quality of service provided.
And they also demanded the home improves the standard of care and welfare of people who use the service, cleanliness and infection control, standards of staffing and requirements relating to workers.
The only standard that was met was treating people with respect and dignity and involving them in their care.
In its original report, the CQC said people at Lincoln Lodge “did not always receive the care and support they required to improve their health and well-being”.
It said assessments were completed, although they did not identify actions that were required to reduce risks, and care records were not written in enough detail to provide clear guidance to staff members.
The report added that residents told them that there was “nothing for them to do and had no stimulation at the home”.
But Mr Poore argued that the changes made by the home should have been reflected in the information released by the commission.
He added that the home was scoring highly in assessments posted by the relatives of residents on the Carehome website, which lists recommendations of such establishments.
The CQC gave the home until last month to improve its assessment and monitoring of services.
A further inspection was carried out last week and a further report will be published in due course.