CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 48 The Grove
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk plans and safe medicines practice, although a small number of medicines records needed improvement.
- Effective?
- Good
- No separate rating or detailed findings were given for Effective in this report.
- Caring?
- Good
- No separate rating or detailed findings were given for Caring in this report.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and reflected people's choices. Staff supported communication, activities, relationships and personal goals.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found positive leadership, regular checks and audits, staff support, and systems for involving people and learning from problems.
What inspectors found, October 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found personalised, safe care, with small improvements needed to medicines records and cleaning.
This was an unannounced inspection on 04 October 2022. Two inspectors spoke with people and staff, observed care, checked care records, medicines records, audits and safety checks, and partly toured the home.
The home supported eight adults with learning disabilities. Inspectors found that people were supported to make choices, build independence, communicate in ways that suited them, take part in activities and stay connected with family and friends.
Safe, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. Inspectors found small problems with some medicines records and areas needing deep cleaning, but the manager took immediate action during the inspection. The rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published in June 2018.
Choice and independence
Staff focused on what people could do and supported them to make choices, pursue interests and live meaningful daily lives.
“The service supported people to have the maximum possible choice, control and independence.” from the report
Personalised communication
Staff understood the different ways people communicated and used individual communication plans to help people express themselves.
“People living at the service used a variety of ways to communicate.” from the report
Activities and community life
People took part in leisure, social and educational activities, including activities in the local community and support to attend college and day centres.
“People spent time in the local community using shops and leisure facilities.” from the report
Good oversight
Managers used checks, audits, meetings and feedback to monitor the service and make improvements.
“There were suitable systems for monitoring and improving the quality of the service.” from the report
Medicines records
minorA small number of medicines records needed improvement. The manager took immediate action to put this right.
“We identified where a small number of improvements were needed with medicines records.” from the report
Deep cleaning
minorInspectors found a small number of areas in the environment that needed deep cleaning. The manager took immediate action.
“We identified a small number of areas where the environment needed deep cleaning.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to the medicines records during and after the inspection?
- 02How do you now check that medicines records remain complete and accurate?
- 03Which areas needed deep cleaning, and how do you check that cleaning standards are maintained?
- 04How will you assess my relative's communication needs and record the best ways to support them?
- 05How will my relative be supported to pursue their interests, access the local community and stay in touch with family?
This was an unannounced inspection focused on how the home applied the Right support, right care, right culture principles; the report gives ratings for Safe, Responsive and Well-led, while Effective and Caring were not separately rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 October 2022 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, June 2018
48 The Grove was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support, with earlier safeguarding improvements confirmed.
This was a comprehensive inspection. The inspector visited on 28 March 2018 without notice and returned on 4 April to complete the inspection. They observed care, spoke with people, staff, managers and health professionals, and checked care, medicines, recruitment, training, complaints and other records.
The home supported up to eight people with learning disabilities, autism and complex needs. Inspectors found systems to protect people from abuse, enough suitably trained staff, safe medicines support and good healthcare and nutrition arrangements. Staff treated people with patience, respect and kindness.
Care was tailored to people's needs, goals and interests. Inspectors saw people being supported to take part in activities, use the community and keep in contact with family. The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
A previous inspection in February 2016 found a breach because possible safeguarding incidents were not always handled properly. A focused inspection in 2017 found that improvements had been made, and this inspection found the safeguarding arrangements were working.
Staffing and safety
Inspectors found enough staff to support people and did not see people waiting for care. Recruitment checks and staff safeguarding training were in place.
“During the inspection we did not see any examples of people having to wait for care or support from staff.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people's histories and preferences. They supported privacy, explained care and helped people when they were anxious or distressed.
“Staff were gentle, empathetic and patient with people, assisting them to move about the home and take part in activities they chose.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans covered people's needs, preferences and goals. Staff supported people to build independence, enjoy activities and take part in community life.
“Care plans reflected people's likes, dislikes and preferences.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider used audits, monitoring visits, feedback and action plans to identify and address improvements. Staff were also encouraged to take responsibility for quality areas.
“The provider had processes in place to monitor quality in the service and make improvements.” from the report
Staff supervision records
minorAn internal check found that only 41% of staff had received supervision in line with the provider's policy. The manager explained the reason, and staff said regular supervision had resumed by the inspection.
“The provider's representative carried out an internal pre-inspection compliance visit in March 2018 and we saw this showed that the percentage of staff who had received regular supervision in line with the provider's policy was 41%.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure all staff receive supervision at the frequency set out in your policy?
- 02What would you do if there were a safeguarding concern about my relative, and how would the family be informed?
- 03How will my relative's care plan reflect their own goals, preferences and communication needs?
- 04How do you review medicines, including any medicines used to manage behaviour?
- 05How will you support my relative to take part in activities, use the community and keep in contact with family?
This was a comprehensive inspection of all five key questions, carried out over two visits, with the first visit unannounced. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 June 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.
Every inspection of 48 The Grove
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvement
- March 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 December 2011.
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 Hounslow
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 £1,270 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult 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.