CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 23 Oak Avenue
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Staff understood individual risks and how people communicated pain, distress or anxiety. Staffing levels were adjusted to risk, and medicines were administered and recorded safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the training and supervision needed for their roles. People were supported with healthcare, dietary needs, consent and decisions made in their best interests.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were calm, kind and respectful. People were offered choices, supported to be independent and cared for in personalised, homely bedrooms.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and based on each person’s needs, preferences and communication style. People were supported with activities, relationships and community life, and there were complaint arrangements.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had clear leadership, regular clinical reviews and monthly quality checks. The providers and manager used information about people’s care to make changes and improvements.
What inspectors found, November 2017
23 Oak Avenue was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and highly personalised care for people with complex needs.
Inspectors visited on 31 August 2017. The visit was announced and was the home’s first inspection. They observed care, spoke with three staff and reviewed care, medicine, staffing, training, incident and complaint records.
The home supported three adults with complex learning disabilities and mental health needs. Inspectors found that staff understood each person’s communication, behaviour, health needs and preferences. Care was adapted to each person, including support to take part in community activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found the home was meeting the required standards at the time of the inspection.
Individual behaviour support
The home used detailed plans and specialist support to understand what people were communicating through their behaviour. Staff adjusted their responses to each person and reviewed risks regularly.
“The providers had fully embraced the principals of Positive Behavioural Support (PBS).” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff giving people time, choices and encouragement. Staff supported independence rather than simply doing things for people.
“We observed all staff to be calm, reassuring and individually responsive to people at all times.” from the report
Personalised activities and communication
People had pictorial and photographic information, personalised care plans and activities linked to their interests. The home supported people to take part in local community life.
“The activities people were involved in were tailored to their choice and lifestyle to encourage participation and reduce social isolation.” from the report
Strong monitoring and improvement
The management team reviewed incidents, risks, medicines, care plans, infection control and staff training. They used this information to make changes and provide further support.
“People were protected by consistent and comprehensive quality audits.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and update my relative’s behaviour support plan and risk assessments?
- 02How would staff understand my relative’s communication if they could not explain pain, distress or choices verbally?
- 03What staffing level would my relative receive during the day, at night and when taking part in community activities?
- 04How would you support my relative’s health needs, including appointments, dietary requirements and medicines?
- 05What activities and community opportunities would be available based on my relative’s interests and preferences?
This was the home’s first comprehensive inspection, covering all five CQC areas, and it included observations, staff discussions and reviews of care, staffing, medicine and quality records. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 November 2017 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 23 Oak Avenue
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- November 2017Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 September 2016.
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.