- Care home
Ermington House
We served two warning notices on Ermington House Ltd on 22 December 2025 for failing to meet the regulations relating to Safe care and treatment and Good governance at Ermington House.
Report from 12 November 2025 assessment
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment: 26 November 2025 to 15 December 2025. The inspection was prompted, in part, due to concerns raised with us about unsafe care and treatment being provided.
Ermington House provides accommodation to a maximum of 34 people who require nursing or support with personal care.Some people living at the service were living with dementia. There were 22 people living at the service at the time of our assessment visit. At the time of our visit, the service was currently under a placement suspension with the local authority due to concerns around safe care and treatment being provided.
At our previous assessment, the service was rated as Requires Improvement. At this assessment, we found the overall rating of the service remained as Requires Improvement.
The provider had not ensured there was a fully effective governance system in place. Whilst we identified some improvements from our lastassessment, we found the absence of effective governance systems and processes had not ensured all risks were identified or mitigated. We identified environmental risks and concerns around infection control practice. The absence of effective oversight by the provider and registered manager placed people at risk.
We found examples where records did not ensure care had been met in line with people’s assessed needs, and some records were contradictory or incomplete. We identified a number of concerns relating to environmental safety issues and some areas of the service were not properly maintained. The provider operated a visual and audio surveillance system within the service and appropriate consent had not been obtained from people where required.
People were not always treated in a dignified and respectful way. Staff were not positive about their employment and told us they did not feel supported by the service leadership and have the opportunity to speak up.
Staff understood safeguarding processes and the service management had escalated concerns where required. We received mixed feedback about the number of staff on duty to meet people’s needs. Staff were recruited safely. Some infection control processes placed people using the service and others at risk.
The service worked with other healthcare professionals; however, all told us working relationships with the service were difficult and gave examples of how this had negatively impacted people at times. Some professionals did note improvements over recent weeks.
Staff received an induction, training, supervision and appraisal to enable them to meet people’s needs. People’s needs relating to eating and drinking were monitored and concerns escalated where required.
The provider was previously in breach of legal regulations in relation to Safe care and treatment, Dignity and respectand Good governance. Whilst some improvements were found at this assessment, sufficient improvements had not been made and the provider remains in breach of these regulations. Inaddition, we identified a further breach in relation to the Premises and equipment regulation.
In instances where CQC has begun a process of regulatory action, we may publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded, if the action has been taken forward.
We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment relating to Dignity and respect and Premises and equipment.
People's experience of this service
We spoke with 14 people who used the service and 3 relatives. We observed care delivery within the service to help us understand the experiences of people who were unable to talk with us due to their dementia. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI) to help us understand the experiences of those people who could not communicate with us.
We spoke with 9 members of staff. This included the provider, the interim manager, care staff and kitchen/domestic staff. We received feedback from 4 health and social care professionals about their views of the service.
People and their relatives spoke mainly positively of the care staff at the service, however, gave less positive and mixed views on their overall experience at Ermington House. People were positive about how respectfully staff supported them, and our observations supported this feedback. Our assessment found elements of risk management, environmental safety, treating people with dignity and respect and governance did not meet the expected standards.