CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 351 Maidstone Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks, safeguarding concerns, incidents, staffing, infection control and medicines were managed safely. Earlier concerns had been investigated with the local safeguarding team.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and staff knew them well. People were supported with food, drink, healthcare, training-informed care and lawful decision-making under the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed to be kind, calm and respectful. People were offered choices, involved in their care and supported to maintain privacy, dignity and important relationships.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans covered people's communication, health needs, preferences, interests and goals. People were supported with activities, community life, relationships and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and provider monitored quality, incidents, complaints, safeguarding and staff performance. They sought views from people, relatives, staff and health professionals and kept an improvement plan.
What inspectors found, December 2018
351 Maidstone Road was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with repairs under way after earlier disruption.
The announced inspection took place on 24 October 2018. It was brought forward because of concerns about safeguarding incidents and behaviours that could expose people to harm. Inspectors spoke with a person living there, a relative, staff and health and social care professionals. They also reviewed care records, staff files, medicines records, complaints, incidents and quality checks.
The home supported up to five people with learning disabilities and/or autism. Four people lived there at the inspection. Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, medicines were given safely, staffing levels were suitable and staff had training for complex needs and behaviours that could challenge.
Inspectors saw kind and calm staff who offered choices and supported people to take part in activities and community life. Care plans were detailed and included communication needs, preferences and health information. The home worked with safeguarding authorities about earlier allegations, and inspectors found no evidence at the visit that people were at risk of harm.
The overall rating and all five question ratings were Good. The home was already rated Good at the previous inspection in September 2017, and this inspection found that the rating continued. Some damage to the building was still being repaired and redecorated.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff interacting positively with people and supporting them in a calm, caring way. Staff respected privacy and gave people everyday choices.
“Staff actively engaged with people and interacted with them positively.” from the report
Personalised activities
Activities were based on people's interests, abilities and sensory needs. People were supported to take part at their own pace and to remain involved in community life.
“People's care plans included a meaningful engagement plan, looking at activities and goals.” from the report
Good oversight
The management team used audits, reviews and an improvement plan to monitor care and learn from incidents. They also worked with relatives and outside professionals.
“People benefitted from a quality of service that was driven by the provider and staff's commitment to monitor and improve their performance.” from the report
Earlier disruption and safety concerns
needs fixingThere had been substantial disruption involving people displaying behaviours that challenged the service, staff and other residents. Inspectors said this had reduced after a change in the number of people living there.
“There had been substantial disruption to the service from people displaying behaviours that challenged the service, staff and other people.” from the report
- 01Have all the repairs and redecoration described in the report been completed, including the kitchen unit doors?
- 02How would you manage risks if a new resident displayed behaviours that could harm themselves or other people?
- 03How are Positive Behavioural Support plans reviewed after an incident or change in behaviour?
- 04How will you support my relative to communicate choices, take part in activities and access the community?
- 05How are relatives involved in care plan reviews and decisions about changing needs?
This was an announced inspection of the overall quality of the home and all five CQC questions; it was brought forward because of safeguarding concerns and the previous Good rating was confirmed. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 December 2018 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, October 2017
351 Maidstone Road was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
Inspectors visited without notice on 20 September 2017. They spoke with three people living in the home, staff, managers and healthcare professionals. They reviewed care records, staff files, medicines, rotas, audits and policies.
The home supported four people with learning disabilities and autism, within a registration for up to seven people. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable risk assessments and up-to-date support plans. Staff were trained and knew people’s needs well.
People were treated with dignity and supported to make choices. They received help with food, healthcare, activities and relationships. The home was rated Good overall, and Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. All five ratings remained Good.
Safe staffing
Staffing levels were planned around people’s needs. Inspectors saw a calm home where staff were not rushed and could respond when people needed support.
“This level of staffing meant staff were able to monitor people so they could immediately engage with them if they needed support or if they become anxious.” from the report
Personalised support
Each person had an up-to-date support plan covering their needs, preferences and risks. Plans were reviewed and updated when circumstances changed.
“Each person had an up to date, personalised support plan, which set out how their care and support needs should be met by staff.” from the report
Respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported their privacy, dignity and communication needs. People appeared relaxed and comfortable with staff.
“We observed that staff were kind, considerate and aware of people's individual communication needs.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to pursue interests, use the community, go on holidays and keep in touch with family and friends.
“People remained active and participated in a variety of activities and events that met their social and physical needs.” from the report
Quality checks
Managers carried out regular audits and created action plans when improvements were needed. Staff and people were encouraged to give feedback.
“We found the audits routinely identified areas they could improve upon and the registered manager produced action plans, which clearly detailed what needed to be done and when action had been taken.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and support my relative’s individual communication needs, especially if they have limited verbal communication?
- 02How are medicines, health needs and medical appointments recorded and checked?
- 03How often will my relative’s support plans and risk assessments be reviewed, and how will I be involved?
- 04What behaviour support plans are in place, and how do you keep the use of physical restraint to a minimum?
- 05How will my relative be supported to take part in activities, visit the community and maintain family relationships?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; the report also notes that the Safe rating had previously improved from Requires Improvement to Good at a focused inspection in March 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 October 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 351 Maidstone Road
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: 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
91 live-in carers within about an hour of Medway
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 £1,250 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
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.