CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Acorn Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Acorn Residential Home rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with limited information about end of life wishes.
This was an unannounced inspection on 22 October 2019. One inspector spoke with five people living in the home, the manager, the provider and two care staff. They also reviewed care records, staff files and policies.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, received their medicines safely, had suitable support from trained staff and were helped to make choices and stay independent.
People were supported with health care, food, communication, activities and relationships. The home had a positive culture and systems for handling complaints and checking quality. However, care plans contained little information about people's end of life wishes, and this needed to be explored.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and the home had safeguarding, risk assessment and incident review systems in place.
“People we spoke with and the surveys they had completed confirmed that people felt safe living at Acorn Residential.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw warm relationships between people and staff. Staff respected people's privacy, dignity, choices and independence.
“We observed people and staff spending time together, communicating in people's chosen way and being comfortable in one another's company.” from the report
Choice and independence
People could make choices about daily routines, activities, travel and support. They were encouraged to do as much as possible for themselves.
“People were supported to be as independent as possible by staff who gave people the time and encouragement to make their own decisions.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans gave staff information about how each person wanted to be supported, including communication and personal preferences.
“Care plans were person centred and informative, helping staff to support people in the way they wanted to be supported.” from the report
Good management
The manager and staff knew people well and used meetings, surveys and checks to monitor the service and involve people.
“The registered manager demonstrated a good knowledge of the needs of people they supported and the staff team.” from the report
End of life wishes not fully recorded
minorCare plans contained only limited information about people's end of life wishes. The manager told inspectors this needed to be explored and discussed with people.
“Care plans contained minimal information on people's end of life wishes.” from the report
- 01How will you discuss and record my relative's end of life wishes?
- 02How often will my relative's care plan and risk assessments be reviewed?
- 03How will you support my relative to make choices about activities, travel and daily routines?
- 04What training and supervision do staff receive, and how do you check that it remains up to date?
- 05How are families involved in surveys, meetings and decisions about changes to care?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the premises and care provided; all five ratings were given. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 November 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.
What inspectors found, May 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a few records and policy issues to check.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 28 March 2017. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, the manager, relatives, healthcare professionals and a member of staff. They also checked care records, staff files, medicines, safety records and other documents.
The inspectors rated all five areas Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. They found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, safe medicines practice, trained staff, good healthcare support and food and drink that met people's needs.
People were treated kindly and with respect. Staff supported people's independence, choices, communication, activities and community involvement. The home had systems to listen to people's views and check the quality of care.
The report also noted some issues. Training could be delayed, the complaints policy was out of date, there was no policy for renewing criminal records checks, and a Legionella test was overdue. The manager said action would be taken on these points.
Enough staff
Inspectors saw enough staff on duty to meet people's needs. Extra staff were available when someone needed to attend a medical appointment.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff communicated well with people and protected their privacy and dignity. The inspection found warm relationships and mutual respect.
“The interactions were characterised by warmth and affection, and there appeared to be a mutual respect for one another.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were supported to take part in activities based on their interests and wishes, including day services, classes, outings and volunteering.
“People were encouraged to participate in activities in line with their interests and wishes.” from the report
Support for independence
People were encouraged to make choices, maintain life skills and take part in everyday tasks such as cooking, cleaning and shopping.
“The service promoted people's independence.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked with healthcare professionals, day centres, colleges, families and other people important to residents to help keep care consistent.
“The provider worked in partnership with others to ensure people received care that was consistent and met their needs.” from the report
Criminal records checks
minorThe home did not have a policy for renewing criminal records checks. The manager said they would consider introducing checks every three years.
“The registered manager told us they did not have a policy for the renewal of criminal records checks.” from the report
Delayed mandatory training
needs fixingThe home relied on local authority training, which meant some staff waited for mandatory training. The manager said other training methods would be explored.
“We saw the provider relied on training offered by the local authority which meant that for some staff there was a delay in them receiving mandatory training.” from the report
Out-of-date complaints policy
minorThe complaints policy referred to organisations that were no longer the correct route for complaints. The manager agreed to update it.
“Notwithstanding the above, we noted the complaints policy was out of date and possibly misleading.” from the report
Overdue water safety test
needs fixingThe Legionella test was out of date when inspectors visited. The manager booked a date for the test and said a copy would be sent to CQC.
“We did note however that the Legionella (bacteria found in water) test was out of date.” from the report
- 01Has the Legionella test been completed, and what did the results show?
- 02How do you now make sure mandatory staff training is completed without delays?
- 03Have you introduced a policy for renewing criminal records checks, and when are checks repeated?
- 04Has the complaints policy been updated to explain the correct route for raising concerns?
- 05How will you support my relative's preferred activities, independence and communication needs?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall quality of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 May 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.
Every inspection of Acorn Residential Home
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Good
- January 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
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 10 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Merton
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 £1,230 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
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.