Baobab Care UK Limited, a Birmingham supported living service, has been placed into special measures after the Care Quality Commission (CQC) downgraded its rating from 'good' to 'inadequate'. The provider, which offers personal care to vulnerable people with learning disabilities, substance abuse issues, and mental health conditions, has acknowledged the findings and says it is taking them "extremely seriously".
Inspectors find basic safety checks missing
Following an inspection in July, CQC inspectors said "basic checks" to "keep people safe" simply "weren't happening". They found the provider had "lost sight of the risks people faced every day", with staff not always managing medicines safely. Fire risks at "dirty" homes had not been properly assessed, posing a risk of serious harm, and more than 20 staff members were allowed to start work without criminal record checks.
The service was supporting 16 people with personal care at the time of the inspection. Inspectors also found that care plans did not reflect people's current needs—one person's plan still listed medication they no longer took, while another person was left without the higher level of support their condition now required.
Director accepts findings and outlines improvements
Baobab Care director Stanley Matawa told BirminghamLive he accepted the CQC's findings. He said: "Firstly, I would like to acknowledge the concerns raised and reassure individuals we support, their families, our staff, commissioners and the wider community that we take the findings extremely seriously. We recognise that certain standards fell below expectations and fully accept our responsibility to address these shortcomings. Our commitment to providing safe, compassionate and person-centred care remains unchanged."
Mr Matawa said he was "not asking the community to overlook" its "shortcomings", but instead to "recognise" his team was "addressing them". He added: "We have undertaken a comprehensive improvement programme since the inspection. This includes strengthening management and governance, improving fire safety and property standards, reviewing safeguarding procedures, enhancing medicines management, and reinforcing safer recruitment, staff training and supervision."
Mr Matawa acknowledged that public confidence "cannot be restored through words alone". He said: "It requires transparency, accountability and demonstrable action. As director, I take responsibility for ensuring that the lessons identified translate into meaningful and lasting improvements. I would also like to recognise our dedicated staff, who continue to provide compassionate care despite the challenges the organisation is facing. We remain committed to rebuilding trust through our actions and delivering the standards of care that individuals and their families rightly expect."
CQC reports six regulation breaches
The CQC found the provider had breached six regulations, including 'safe care and treatment', 'safeguarding', 'staffing', 'fit and proper persons employed', 'person-centred care', and 'overall management of the service'. Amanda Lyndon, CQC's deputy director of adult social care for the West Midlands, said "leaders had lost sight of the risks people faced every day" and that "basic checks simply weren't happening". She added that when issues did emerge, "nobody was learning from them".
Ms Lyndon said relatives had "mixed experiences" from using the service. She said: "Staff didn't always manage medicines safely, and they couldn't be sure people were getting the right treatment, because there was no record of what had been prescribed. Some of the homes people lived in were dirty, damaged and hard to keep clean, and fire risks hadn't been properly assessed, posing risks of serious harm. The service hadn't recognised or reported several safeguarding concerns to the local authority and hadn't always followed up when people went missing for long periods. When people or their families complained, they often weren't listened to, and some told us they'd simply given up complaining."
Specific failings and positive findings
Inspectors found that leaders lacked effective systems to check the quality and safety of care, so widespread problems went unnoticed and unaddressed. The service let more than 20 staff start work without the criminal record checks needed to confirm they were safe to support vulnerable people, with some carrying out unsupervised visits for months. The service had commissioned fire risk assessments but hadn't completed the urgent work these assessments identified, leading inspectors to refer the service to the local fire service.
Less than a third of staff had completed training on mental capacity and consent, though most staff spoken to understood what this meant in practice. However, inspectors noted that staff usually knew people well and had built trusted relationships with them over time. The provider remains in special measures and must demonstrate sustained improvement to meet the required standards.
