Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at 63 Coronation Road

Requires improvementpublished 29 June 2026, 3 months ago

Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, October 2017

Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with a significant damp problem still awaiting repair.

The unannounced inspection took place on 12 September 2017. One inspector spoke with four people, two support staff and the registered manager. Records about two people, medicines, staff and quality checks were also reviewed.

The home supported up to six people with mental health needs. Five people were living there during the visit. Inspectors found Good care in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.

People said they felt safe and got on well with staff. Staff were trained, people's health needs were met, support plans were reviewed, and people were encouraged to make choices and stay independent.

Inspectors found a significant damp problem near a staircase. The manager had reported it and there was a plan to repair it, but the work had not been completed. One risk assessment also used wording that could suggest restrictions, although the manager said the person could go out as they pleased.

What inspectors praised
  • Kind and respectful staff

    Inspectors saw positive relationships between staff and people. People said they got on well with staff.

    “People were supported by staff who were kind and caring. Staff spoke warmly and positively about the people they supported.” from the report
  • Personal support

    Support plans included people's histories, communication needs, preferences and what a good or bad day looked like. Plans were reviewed with the person.

    “Support plans were discussed with the person concerned and evaluated regularly.” from the report
  • Staffing and training

    Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff received training, supervision and appraisals.

    “There were sufficient numbers of staff to ensure people's safety and to meet their needs.” from the report
  • Promoting independence

    People could follow their own routines, make snacks and drinks, visit local places and maintain important relationships. The manager was also exploring technology to support independence with medicines.

    “People were encouraged to be independent in their lives and staff actively sought ways to promote this.” from the report
  • Good oversight

    The home used regular checks on areas such as medicines, training and notifications. Staff meetings and wider organisational audits supported monitoring.

    “There were systems in place to identify issues and concerns with the service and these led to action being taken to address and resolve the concern.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Damp and damaged wall

    needs fixing

    A wall near the staircase had significant damp, with plaster coming away and damage to the wall. The issue had been reported more than 12 months earlier, but repairs were still outstanding, although a plan was in place.

    “There was one wall in the home with significant damp which had caused plaster to come away from the wall and caused damage on the wall by the side of the staircase.” from the report
  • Risk assessment wording

    minor

    One risk assessment used the word 'allowed' about where a person could go alone. Inspectors said this could suggest restrictions on the person's freedom, although the manager confirmed the person could go out as they wished.

    “We noted that for one person the language used in their risk assessment could indicate restrictions on their liberty.” from the report
  • Limited snack choices

    minor

    One person said there was fruit available but wanted a wider choice of snacks between meals. This was raised with the manager.

    “One person told us that there was always fruit available for snacks but would like a wider range of options for snacks in between meals.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01Has the significant damp and damaged wall near the staircase now been fully repaired, and when was this completed?
  2. 02How do you check that risk assessments use wording that supports people's freedom and choices?
  3. 03What snack choices are now available between meals?
  4. 04How often are support plans reviewed with each person, and what happens when their needs change?
  5. 05How are people supported to manage their own medicines safely, including the use of assistive technology?

This was an unannounced inspection of all five CQC quality areas, using discussions with four people, two staff and the manager, records for two people, and other service records. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of 63 Coronation Road

2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. October 2017Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at 63 Coronation Road →

  2. September 2015Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. December 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. October 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. November 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. 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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

40 live-in carers within about an hour of Bristol, City of

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 £1,300 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.

“She became a good friend to my mother in law, chatting with her, dancing with her, knitting with her and the list goes on”
Nicola B., about Lynnette M.
“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”
Katrina O., about Sekai M.
See live-in carers near Bristol, City ofProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.