CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 12 Channel Lea
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, June 2019
Rated Good in every area; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with end-of-life plans still to be developed.
The inspection took place on 29 April 2019. One inspector visited the home, spoke with two residents, two relatives and two staff, and reviewed records including one support plan, medicines, training, audits and incidents.
There were three people living at the home. Inspectors found that people were safe, received medicines as prescribed and had enough trained staff to support them. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect, and were involved in choices about their care, meals and activities.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was a scheduled inspection, and the home had also been rated Good at the previous inspection published on 9 November 2016.
Safe medicines support
People received their medicines as prescribed. Records were complete, medicines were stored safely and staff assessed how much support each person needed.
“Medicine administration records (MARs) were complete and there were no gaps in records.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People said they were happy and inspectors observed friendly, respectful relationships between people and staff.
“We observed people being treated with kindness and compassion.” from the report
Choice and independence
People chose their meals, activities and when to access the community. Staff supported people to build skills and maintain independence.
“People told us that they had a say in their support and were able to make choices and decisions whilst living at the service.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff had completed mandatory and specialist training, including autism and mental health awareness. Inspectors saw staff applying their knowledge appropriately.
“All the staff at the service had completed the provider's mandatory training” from the report
Good management checks
The home had regular audits and an open culture. Inspectors found that identified actions were followed up.
“There continued to be a system in place to check the quality of the service and make improvements as appropriate.” from the report
End-of-life planning
minorEnd-of-life support plans had not yet been written. The manager knew this was needed and planned to address it, although no one was receiving end-of-life care at the time.
“End of life support plans had not yet been developed.” from the report
- 01How will you develop and review an end-of-life support plan if my relative needs this?
- 02How will my relative's support plan be reviewed if their needs, goals or activities change?
- 03How do you make sure medicines are given safely and records remain complete?
- 04How would you support my relative to make choices while managing risks in the community?
- 05How can my relative or our family raise a concern, and who would respond?
This was a scheduled inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home environment; the inspector reviewed one person's support plan and records. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 June 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, November 2016
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and person-centred care, with some checks and feedback systems needing attention.
This was an announced inspection on 4 October 2016. One inspector visited because the home was small. They met three people, spoke with two people and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, recruitment, training and management records.
Inspectors found enough staff who knew people well. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They were supported to make choices, manage their medicines, stay healthy, take part in activities and remain as independent as possible.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. There were no breaches of regulations. Inspectors identified that two staff had not yet had their medicines competency formally assessed, and recommended wider feedback from professionals and commissioners.
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated people with patience and respect. They understood how each person preferred to communicate and when they needed privacy or quiet.
“Staff were kind and caring to people and treated them with dignity and respect at all times.” from the report
Enough familiar staff
Staffing was planned around people's needs, appointments and activities. Cover was provided by staff or bank workers who knew people well.
“There were always enough staff around when people needed them, and staff had time to spend with people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's routines, preferences and abilities. Staff knew what could make people anxious and adapted their support.
“Detailed guidance was provided to staff about how to support people, to ensure that it was consistent and as they preferred.” from the report
Positive staff leadership
Staff said they felt supported and motivated. The senior support worker and acting deputy manager knew the home and the people living there well.
“Staff were motivated and enjoyed working at the service.” from the report
Two medicines assessments incomplete
needs fixingTwo staff had been observed supporting people with medicines, but the provider had not completed their formal competency assessments. Inspectors recorded this as an area for improvement, although they found no concerns about the staff's practice.
“Two staff had been observed supporting people with their medicines but the provider's competency assessment had not been completed.” from the report
Wider feedback was overdue
needs fixingThe provider's process for gathering feedback from people, relatives and staff had not been completed since October 2014. Inspectors recommended seeking views from visiting professionals and commissioners as well.
“This process had not been completed since October 2014.” from the report
Annual quality audit was due
minorThe provider's annual quality assurance audit was last completed in October 2015, and another audit was due at the time of inspection.
“The provider completed an annual quality assurance audit. This process was last completed in October 2015 and a further audit was due.” from the report
- 01Have the two staff members who supported medicines completed their formal competency assessments, and how are medicines skills checked now?
- 02When was the provider's most recent feedback exercise completed, and whose views were included?
- 03Has the overdue annual quality assurance audit been completed, and what actions did it identify?
- 04Who is responsible for the home's day-to-day running while the registered manager is not in charge?
- 05How will the home continue to support my relative to go out, make choices and remain independent safely?
This was the home's first announced inspection and covered all five CQC questions: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 November 2016 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of 12 Channel Lea
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 June 2014.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.