CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Abbeyfield - St George's House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, safe medicines systems, appropriate staff recruitment checks and infection control arrangements. Staff knew how to raise safeguarding concerns and accidents were investigated.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed, staff received training and people were supported with food, drink and healthcare. The home also followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw kind and respectful interactions. People were involved in decisions about their care, privacy and independence, and were supported to follow their own routines.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans included information about people's preferences and staff knew people well. People could take part in activities, raise complaints and discuss their end-of-life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a clear management structure, regular audits and systems to investigate issues and drive improvement. Staff said they felt supported by the senior team.
What inspectors found, October 2022
Abbeyfield - St George's House rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with improvements since the last inspection.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 10 October 2022. One inspector spoke with seven people, two relatives and six staff. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff recruitment files, training information and checks on how the home was managed.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they were happy, felt safe and received kind care. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines systems, appropriate healthcare support, activities, complaint handling and end-of-life planning.
The previous inspection, published on 20 June 2019, rated the home Requires Improvement and found two breaches of regulations. At this inspection, inspectors found improvements and said the home was no longer in breach. The home remains subject to routine CQC monitoring.
Safe medicines
Staff were trained to support people with medicines and their competence was checked. Records and systems for ordering, storing, giving and disposing of medicines were in good order.
“Medicine records we reviewed were in good order.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People spoke positively about the care, and inspectors observed kind interactions. The home supported people's privacy, independence, choices and personal routines.
“We observed staff were kind and caring towards people and there were positive interactions between staff and people throughout the inspection.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People had food choices and special diets were catered for. Weight was monitored and people were referred to healthcare professionals when needed.
“Where special diets were needed these were catered for.” from the report
Improved management
Since the previous inspection, the home had introduced audits and stronger oversight. Inspectors found this had helped drive improvements.
“Audits had been put into place and were being consistently completed and updated.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01The report says care plans were still being reviewed. How will you make sure my relative's current preferences and needs are fully recorded?
- 02How many staff will usually be on duty for my relative's needs, and when would agency staff be used?
- 03What activities are available, and how will you support my relative's own interests and routines?
- 04How will you discuss and record my relative's wishes for end-of-life care?
- 05How are medicines audits used to check that my relative receives medicines safely?
This was an unannounced inspection by one inspector covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 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 2019
Abbeyfield - St George's House was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care but gaps in care records, activities and management checks.
Inspectors visited without notice on 15 May 2019. They spoke with 11 people, two relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care files, recruitment records and other service records.
People said they felt safe and received kind care. Medicines were given safely, staff had suitable training, people were supported with food and healthcare, and staff respected people's choices and dignity.
However, some care plans were out of date or contained conflicting information. There were concerns about staffing levels, limited activities and checks that were not kept up to date. The service was rated Requires Improvement overall in every area except Caring, which was rated Good.
The previous overall rating was Good, published in October 2016. Inspectors identified two breaches of regulations and said they would monitor the service and return according to the inspection timescales for Requires Improvement services.
Kind and respectful care
People spoke positively about staff, and inspectors saw staff supporting dignity, independence and personal choice.
“Staff cared for people in an empathetic and kind manner.” from the report
Safe medicines support
People received their medicines at the right time and in the right way. Only trained and competent staff administered them.
“People received their medication safely and when they needed it.” from the report
Health and nutrition support
People were supported with meals, special diets and healthcare appointments. Staff worked with several health professionals when needed.
“When needed people received support from district nurses, palliative care team, physiotherapists, and occupational therapist.” from the report
Safeguarding awareness
Staff knew how to identify abuse, raise concerns and use whistleblowing procedures.
“Staff knew how to keep people safe and protect them from safeguarding concerns.” from the report
Too few organised activities
needs fixingActivities were described as occasional rather than regular. Inspectors found that people's sensory needs were not always supported so they could take part.
“There was a lack of organised activities for people to join in.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousSeveral audits, including care plan and equipment checks, were not up to date. This meant problems could have gone unnoticed.
“Several issues were picked up with care plans which could have been found earlier if these audits were regularly completed.” from the report
- 01How are care plans now reviewed and checked for accurate information about choking risks, nutrition and moving and handling?
- 02What staffing levels are in place on each shift, and how will you prevent people waiting for help?
- 03What regular individual and group activities are available, including activities for people with poor vision?
- 04Which audits are now completed, how often are they reviewed, and how do you make sure identified actions are completed?
- 05Has the lift been repaired, and what arrangements are in place if it is unavailable?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall service rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 June 2019 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 Abbeyfield - St George's House
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2022Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Abbeyfield - St George's House →
- June 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Abbeyfield - St George's House →
- October 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 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
51 live-in carers within about an hour of Southend-on-Sea
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 £960 to £1,200 a week. 44 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
“She was always cheerful and looking for ways to stimulate my mother. She became her "friend" and provided best care always.”
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.