CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 80-82 London Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infections, using PPE safely, arranging testing, supporting social distancing and admitting people safely. The home was also using cleaning, isolation and contingency arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that the home had strong infection prevention and control measures.
This was a targeted inspection on 11 November 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic. The inspection was announced in advance.
Inspectors found good practice. They were assured that visitors were checked, PPE was used safely, testing was in place, and the home supported social distancing and safe admissions.
The home was rated “Inspected but not rated”. This is not an overall quality rating. The report says the service was safe in the area inspected, but other areas of care were not assessed.
Testing and infection checks
Staff were tested weekly and people living at the home were tested every 28 days. Individual risk assessments and best interest decisions were made about testing.
“Staff were being tested weekly and people they supported were being tested every 28 days.” from the report
Safe visiting arrangements
Visitors had their temperature checked, were expected to be well and had to use the correct PPE. Visiting information and contact tracing arrangements were clearly displayed.
“Staff greeted visitors and took their temperature when they arrived at the home.” from the report
Adapted environment
Furniture and rooms were rearranged to support social distancing. The home also used extra cleaning and self-flushing toilets to help reduce infection risks.
“The environment had been adapted by moving furniture to enable social distancing.” from the report
Staff preparation and planning
Staff received extra infection control training and training to help identify early signs of health deterioration. Policies, checks and contingency plans were in place.
“There were clear policies, procedures, quality assurance checks and contingency plans in place in respect of managing the pandemic and keeping people and staff safe.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How often are staff and people living at the home tested now?
- 02How are visitors currently checked, provided with PPE and recorded for contact tracing?
- 03What arrangements are used when someone is admitted or returns from hospital, including any period of isolation?
- 04How do staff use the training described in the report to recognise early signs of a person becoming unwell?
- 05How often are infection control policies, quality checks and contingency plans reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide ratings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 November 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, April 2018
Byways was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a small concern about how one textured meal was presented.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 25 March 2018. One inspector met six of the eight people living at the home, spoke with staff and observed care. They also checked care records, medicines, staff files, training, rotas and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, detailed care plans and staff who understood people's needs and choices.
People were treated warmly and supported to make choices, stay healthy, maintain relationships and take part in community activities. Inspectors noted that one textured meal had been blended together rather than presented in separate parts. This was raised with the manager, who agreed to review it.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm, calm and positive interactions. Staff respected privacy and treated people as individuals.
“People were supported by staff that were kind and caring towards them.” from the report
Personalised care plans
Care plans included people's communication needs, routines, preferences, relationships and interests. They were reviewed and updated regularly.
“Each care plan included up to date guidance to support staff to provide care that met people's needs.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
There were enough staff to support people safely, including extra staff for community activities. Medicines were securely stored and checked.
“People were supported by a sufficient number of suitably competent staff to keep them safe.” from the report
Community involvement
People were supported to go out, see family and take part in activities such as trips, holidays and visits to community venues.
“There was evidence that people went out most days with the support of staff.” from the report
Presentation of a textured meal
needs fixingOne person's textured meal had all parts blended into one serving. Inspectors said the parts should be blended and served separately, and raised this with the manager.
“However one person who required a texturised meal had their all the parts of the meal blended into one texturised serving.” from the report
Previous training and supervision action
minorA previous provider visit had identified that staff training and supervision needed to be kept up to date. The current report says staff were properly supported and trained, but this is worth checking.
“These included ensuring staff training and staff supervision was kept up to date.” from the report
- 01What action was taken after inspectors raised the presentation of the textured meal?
- 02How do you check that textured meals are presented in separate, appealing parts?
- 03How do you make sure staff training and supervision stay up to date?
- 04How often are each person's care plans reviewed, and how are families involved?
- 05How do you ensure there are enough staff when people go out or attend community activities?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the premises and care provided, with ratings given for all five key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 April 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 80-82 London Road
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
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.