CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 2a Court Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found safe medicines management, suitable staffing, recruitment checks and regularly reviewed risk assessments. A missing risk assessment for creams containing liquid paraffin was written during the inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff received induction, training, supervision and appraisals. People were supported with consent, best-interest decisions, nutrition and specialist healthcare, although one DoLS review condition remained outstanding.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Staff showed strong knowledge of people's individual communication, preferences and anxieties. Inspectors observed warm, positive interactions and found that staff supported people to achieve things they had previously found difficult.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personal, detailed and reviewed monthly. People were supported with activities, holidays, community access, independence and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a registered manager, clear lines of responsibility and regular audits. People, relatives and staff were given opportunities to share their views and contribute to improvements.
What inspectors found, March 2019
Rated Good, with Outstanding caring; inspectors found person-centred support, safe care and well-managed activities.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 21 January 2019. One inspector observed care, spoke with one person, relatives, staff and the registered manager, and checked care records, medicines, staffing, training, accidents, complaints and quality checks.
The home continued to be rated Good overall. Safe, effective, responsive and well-led care were all rated Good. Caring improved from Good to Outstanding.
Inspectors found that staff understood people's complex needs and supported them in individual ways. People were helped to make choices, stay involved in their communities and maintain their independence. The home was clean, medicines were well managed and staffing was considered sufficient.
There were two issues identified during the visit. Risk assessments were not in place for some creams containing liquid paraffin, but this was corrected immediately. One condition attached to a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisation still needed a social worker review.
Kind and personal care
Staff built strong relationships and adapted support to each person's communication, preferences and anxieties.
“Staff were compassionate, kind and caring and had developed excellent relationships with people.” from the report
Supporting independence
People were helped to take part in activities, work, volunteering and community life, including activities that had previously seemed too difficult.
“People were supported to maintain their independence and access the community.” from the report
Good understanding of needs
Staff understood people's complex needs and worked with health professionals to support wellbeing and reduce distress.
“Staff had an excellent understanding of people's needs and found imaginative ways to ensure people were supported in a person-centred way which put people at the centre of the service.” from the report
Strong management checks
The registered manager used audits, staff feedback and quality checks to monitor the home and act when improvements were needed.
“There were effective quality assurance systems in place to monitor care and plan ongoing improvements.” from the report
Missing risk assessments for some creams
needs fixingRisk assessments were not initially in place for creams containing liquid paraffin. The manager addressed this immediately and updated emergency evacuation information for staff.
“Where people used creams that contained liquid paraffin, there were no risk assessments in place for these.” from the report
One DoLS review condition outstanding
needs fixingThirteen people were subject to DoLS. The home met the conditions checked, except for one condition requiring a social worker to complete a review.
“Where people had conditions attached to their DoLS these had been met, with the exception of one condition which was for a social worker to complete a review.” from the report
- 01What action was taken after the missing risk assessments for creams containing liquid paraffin were identified?
- 02Has the outstanding social worker review linked to a person's DoLS condition now been completed?
- 03How will you explain choices and support decision-making for someone who cannot communicate verbally?
- 04How are care plans and risk assessments reviewed when a person's needs or anxieties change?
- 05What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative based on their interests and abilities?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions; the inspection report says all ratings except Caring remained unchanged from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 March 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.
Every inspection of 2a Court Road
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 November 2010.
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 South Gloucestershire
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 £1,020 to £1,280 a week. 32 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.