CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 23 Trittiford Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found effective safeguarding, risk management, recruitment and medicines systems. The home was clean, and accidents were reviewed so care plans and risk assessments could be updated.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and worked with health professionals, including dietitians and speech and language therapists. People were supported with health checks, dietary needs and decisions made in their best interests.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were offered choices and supported to communicate, stay connected with family and maintain independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans included people's histories, likes, dislikes and communication needs. People were supported to follow their interests and visit family, although staff said more activities were possible when morning staffing was higher.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open and friendly culture. Managers used audits, feedback, staff training and improvement plans to monitor and develop the service.
What inspectors found, March 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some limits on activities when staffing was lower.
This was a planned, unannounced inspection. One inspector visited on 10 February 2020 and the inspection activity continued until 11 February. Inspectors spoke with staff, relatives and health professionals, observed care, and checked care, medicines, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, medicines were managed safely, staff understood people's needs, and people received support from health professionals.
People were treated with kindness and offered choices in daily life. Care plans reflected people's histories and preferences. The home had good systems for checking quality and making improvements.
Safe medicines systems
The home had systems for ordering, storing, giving and disposing of medicines. Staff who gave medicines were trained and their skills were checked regularly.
“There were robust medication systems in place.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people as individuals and treated them with warmth, dignity and respect. People appeared relaxed around staff.
“We saw staff interacting well with service users, showing care, compassion and kindness.” from the report
Choice and communication
People were involved in everyday decisions, including what to watch, eat, drink and where to go. Picture-based communication was available for people who needed it.
“We observed people being given the choice of where they wanted to go, what they would like to watch on TV, eat and drink.” from the report
Strong links with health services
Staff worked with community health professionals and supported people to attend health checks. Specialist professionals also helped staff meet dietary and swallowing needs.
“We saw there were regular visits from community learning disability health professionals, and people were supported by staff, to have health checks” from the report
Good management checks
The management team completed audits and had plans for continued improvement. Staff and families were asked for their views.
“There are robust audits in place and improvement plans to continue to develop and improve the service.” from the report
Activities varied with staffing
needs fixingA staff member said the home could offer more activities and outings when there were four morning staff rather than three. The report says extra staff were available at times for planned activities.
“When we have four staff in the morning it is better than three, we could do more activities and go out more often” from the report
- 01How many staff are usually on duty in the morning, and how often are there three rather than four?
- 02How will you make sure the person has regular activities and outings when staffing is lower?
- 03How will you support the person's particular communication needs, including the use of pictures or other communication methods?
- 04How will you manage any swallowing, PEG feeding, dietary or choking risks relevant to the person?
- 05How will the person's family be involved in care reviews and decisions about changing needs?
This was a planned, unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and all five ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 March 2020 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, August 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with previous medicine recording errors addressed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 28 June 2017. One inspector observed care, spoke with relatives, staff and a healthcare professional, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records. People could not tell the inspector about their experiences, so observations and other people's views were important.
The home supported five people, although it could accommodate up to six. It provided residential care and nursing care for people with learning disabilities and physical disabilities. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems, suitable training, kind interactions and care that was adapted to people's communication and health needs.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home remained Good, the same overall rating as at the previous inspection on 18 February 2015.
Safe staffing arrangements
Inspectors saw enough staff on duty and found bank staff were available at short notice if needed. Recruitment checks had also been completed.
“We saw that the provider had bank staff available at short notice, who they could call upon in the event of an emergency.” from the report
Support for nutrition and health
Staff were trained to support tube feeding and swallowing needs. Dieticians and speech and language professionals were involved in people's care.
“We saw there was regular input for all people living at the home from the dietician and the Speech and Language Therapist (SALT) to support people to maintain a healthy diet.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff understood people's individual needs and communicated in ways people could respond to. Inspectors saw people appearing calm and comfortable with staff.
“We could see from the people's expressions they were calm, relaxed and comfortable in the presence of staff and during all staff interactions with people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care was planned with people and their families. Records included individual information and guidance about how people preferred to communicate.
“We saw that people's care and support was planned in partnership with them and their family members.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider carried out audits and used action plans when concerns were found. Medicine errors were investigated and actions were taken to reduce the risk of them happening again.
“Quality audits were carried out around key aspects of the service and we saw evidence that action plans were put in place to remedy any concerns raised.” from the report
Previous medicine recording errors
needs fixingThe provider's information return reported a high number of medicine errors, mostly administrative issues such as missing signatures. Staff had been retrained and the four medicine records checked during the inspection had no errors.
“The Provider Information Return had identified a high number of medication errors.” from the report
Staffing during busy appointment days
needs fixingStaff said there could sometimes be a need for more staff when several people had hospital or doctor appointments on the same day. Inspectors nevertheless found enough staff on duty during the visit.
“There are sometimes you could do with more staff particularly if people [living at the home] have a number of hospital or doctor appointments to attend (on the same day)” from the report
- 01How many medicine recording errors have there been since this inspection, and how are signatures and medicine records checked now?
- 02How do you arrange staffing when several people have hospital or doctor appointments on the same day?
- 03How will the home support my relative's specific communication, tube feeding or swallowing needs?
- 04How often are care plans reviewed with relatives, and how will I be told about changes?
- 05Who is the registered manager now, and how can families raise concerns with them?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC areas, with ratings given for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 August 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 Trittiford Road
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 March 2012.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.