CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Aaron Court Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors looked only at infection control and related concerns. They found the home clean, PPE being used appropriately during the visit, and procedures for staff returning from holidays being followed.
- 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, October 2020
Aaron Court Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found infection control was being followed after an earlier PPE guidance concern.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 25 August 2020. It followed concerns about infection control, the use of personal protective equipment and staff following government guidance. The inspector spoke with three people and four staff, observed PPE use and checked infection control records.
Inspectors found the home was clean and free from bad smells. Staff had access to PPE, used it appropriately during the visit and had up-to-date infection control training. The home had an infection control policy, cleaning schedule and regular audits.
There had been an indication that PPE guidance was not being followed and that systems for keeping up with changing guidance were not in place. The provider took action, including signing up for local authority updates. Inspectors found staff holidays and quarantine were being managed in line with government guidance.
The service was inspected but not rated at this visit. Its previous overall rating was Good, published in March 2020, and that rating remained unchanged. This inspection did not assess the whole service.
Clean surroundings
Inspectors found all areas of the home clean and without unpleasant smells.
“We found all areas of the home to be clean and free of malodours.” from the report
PPE and infection training
Staff had access to PPE and had received up-to-date infection control training. Inspectors observed appropriate PPE use during the visit.
“Staff had received up to date infection control training to ensure safe working practices.” from the report
Cleaning checks
The provider had an infection control policy, regular audits and a cleaning schedule for the whole home.
“A cleaning schedule was in place to ensure the whole home was effectively cleaned on a regular basis.” from the report
Holiday quarantine procedures
Inspectors found that staff returning from holidays were managed in line with the government guidance in force at the time.
“We found safe procedures had been followed following staff holidays in line with current government guidance.” from the report
Keeping up with changing PPE guidance
needs fixingThere had been an indication that staff were not wearing the right PPE and that systems for tracking changing guidance were not in place. The provider took action by making staff aware of the change and signing up for local authority updates.
“There was an indication that staff were not wearing appropriate PPE and there were not systems in place to keep up to date with the changing guidance.” from the report
- 01How do you keep staff informed when infection control and PPE guidance changes?
- 02How do you check that staff are using the correct PPE every time it is needed?
- 03How are staff returning from overseas travel assessed and managed under the current rules?
- 04How often are infection control audits carried out, and can families see the actions from the latest audit?
- 05How are testing, visiting and infection outbreak arrangements kept up to date?
This was a targeted inspection of specific infection control concerns within Safe; it did not assess the whole service, and the previous overall Good rating from March 2020 remained unchanged. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 October 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, March 2020
Aaron Court Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some improvements needed in incident records and links with other care services.
This was an unannounced inspection on 28 January 2020. One inspector spoke with people living in the home, visitors, staff and a health professional. They also reviewed care records, recruitment and training files, medicines, complaints and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines practice, personalised care plans, kind relationships and regular activities. People received food, healthcare and support suited to their needs.
There were two areas to improve. Some accident and incident forms did not record immediate action or follow-up correctly, and one fall was recorded on the wrong form. The registered manager was also not meeting with other care services to keep up with current best practice.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff on duty and safe recruitment checks. Medicines were administered by trained and competent staff, with records checked each round.
“People received their medicines as prescribed. Medicines were well managed and administered by those staff who had been trained and were competent.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives were very positive about the staff. Inspectors saw friendly, gentle interactions and found that privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
“Staff provided genuine loving care, and were always polite, compassionate and gentle.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were involved in decisions about their care, food and activities. The home offered group activities, one-to-one time, weekly trips and visits from entertainers.
“The activities organiser spent one-to-one time with people who did not wish to participate in group activities.” from the report
Good leadership and feedback
The management team was involved in daily care and used audits, surveys and action plans to respond to feedback.
“There was a programme of audits and quality checks in place.” from the report
Incident records
needs fixingSome forms did not show what immediate action had been taken or what follow-up was needed. One fall was also recorded using an employee incident form.
“The forms used did not allow for a record to be made of any immediate action taken or any follow up.” from the report
Keeping up with best practice
needs fixingThe registered manager was not attending care forums or meeting managers from other local care services. Inspectors recommended creating these links.
“We recommend that the provider and registered manager seek opportunities to work collaboratively with other relevant external agencies to support care provision, service development and joined-up care.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to ensure falls and other incidents are recorded on the correct forms?
- 02How do you now record immediate action and follow-up after an incident?
- 03How does the registered manager keep up with current best practice and work with other local care services?
- 04How are residents and relatives currently involved in meetings and decisions about activities, food and care?
- 05How are pending Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications being followed up?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, and all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 March 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.
Every inspection of Aaron Court Care Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- October 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 January 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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.