CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Addison Park
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm, medicines were managed safely, and staffing levels met people's needs. Inspectors noted gaps in medicine fridge and room temperature records and asked for used PPE to be discarded properly.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received care from staff with the relevant skills, and healthcare needs were monitored. Formal recorded supervision, appraisal and some induction and training updates had been delayed.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. No areas of concern were identified from the information held, so the previous rating was used.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. No areas of concern were identified from the information held, so the previous rating was used.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home was well managed, with accessible records, regular audits and good teamwork. There was no registered manager at the time, although the current manager was applying for registration.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care, but staff supervision and some records needed improvement.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 19 April 2022. One inspector spoke with six people, four staff, the manager and deputy manager, a visiting healthcare professional and one relative. They also checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were each rated Good. Inspectors found people felt safe and were happy with their care. Medicines were given safely and on time, staffing was sufficient, and the home was clean and well maintained.
There were some areas to improve. Formal recorded supervision, appraisal and some training had been delayed. There were gaps in records of medicine storage temperatures, some DoLS records were inaccurate, and the provider was asked to ensure used PPE was discarded properly.
The inspection did not examine Caring or Responsive. Those areas were not considered a concern from the information held, so earlier ratings were used in the overall rating. The previous overall rating was Good, published in July 2019.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they were happy with their care and felt safe. Staff knew how to recognise and respond to risks.
“People told us they were happy with the care they received and people said they felt safe living there.” from the report
Kind and personal care
Inspectors saw staff spending time with people and supporting their personal interests and wellbeing.
“People looked happy and comfortable with staff supporting them.” from the report
Safe medicines
The electronic medicines system had improved records, and inspectors found that medicines were given safely and on time.
“People received their medicines safely and on time.” from the report
Good management
Managers were visible and approachable. Audits, incident reviews and staff workshops were used to improve the service.
“The management and staff worked well together.” from the report
Staff supervision and training
needs fixingNot all staff had received planned, recorded supervision. Some training and induction had also been delayed because of the pandemic.
“Not all staff had been provided with planned, recorded meetings to discuss their individual work and development needs, in line with the service's supervision policy.” from the report
Some safety records
minorThere were gaps in daily records of medicine fridge and room temperatures. The home added an electronic prompt after inspectors raised this.
“However, the were gaps in these records.” from the report
Used PPE disposal
needs fixingInspectors recommended that the home make sure used protective equipment was disposed of correctly.
“However, we recommend that the provider ensure all used PPE is discarded appropriately.” from the report
DoLS records
needs fixingRecords for applications to restrict people's liberty did not fully match information held by the local authority team. The home was connected with that team to correct the records.
“However, the service records for such applications were not entirely accurate and did not match with the information held by the DoLS team.” from the report
Family communication
minorOne relative said they did not receive enough information or contact. The manager said this would be followed up.
“I don't feel I get the information I need at the moment.” from the report
- 01Have all staff now received the formal recorded supervision, appraisal and induction or training updates identified in the report?
- 02How do you now make sure medicine fridge and medicine room temperatures are recorded every day?
- 03What changes have been made to ensure used PPE is discarded appropriately?
- 04Have the records about Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications been checked and corrected with the local authority team?
- 05How will you keep relatives informed, especially when they live far away or cannot visit easily?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and previous ratings were used. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 May 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, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and staffing arrangements during a COVID-19 outbreak.
Inspectors visited the home on 26 January 2022. This was an announced, targeted inspection during a COVID-19 outbreak. They checked infection prevention and control and asked about staffing pressures.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks well. They found extra cleaning, suitable use of personal protective equipment, visitor checks and testing arrangements. Essential care givers could still visit, and relatives were kept informed when visiting was restricted.
Staff absences linked to COVID-19 were low and shifts were covered by existing staff, the manager, bank staff and agency staff. People living at the home spoke positively about the staff and said they could get help when needed.
The service was inspected but not rated. Safe was also marked inspected but not rated, and this report did not give ratings for Effective, Caring, Responsive or Well-led.
Managing the outbreak
Staff and the manager had taken steps to contain the COVID-19 outbreak. Staffing absences linked to the outbreak were low.
“Staff and the manager had worked hard to contain this outbreak within the service.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that infection control arrangements were suitable. The home had extra cleaning procedures and appropriate PPE.
“Additional cleaning protocols were in place to ensure all high touch points were regularly sanitised.” from the report
Safe visiting
The home had a designated visitor area, checked vaccination status and self-test results, and provided PPE and hand sanitiser. Essential care givers could continue to visit.
“There was a designated area for receiving all visitors to the service, checking their vaccination status and their Covid-19 self test result.” from the report
Communication with relatives
The home explained visiting restrictions and kept relatives informed. Staff also helped people maintain contact with relatives while restrictions were in place.
“Staff had maintained regular communication with relatives and supported and encouraged people to keep in touch with their relatives while visiting was restricted.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What staffing levels do you have now, and how would you cover shifts if staff were absent?
- 02Are the extra cleaning arrangements for high-touch areas still in place?
- 03How do you currently check visitors' vaccination status and COVID-19 test results?
- 04How would you manage visiting if there were another infection outbreak?
- 05How do you help residents keep in touch with relatives if visiting is restricted?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and staffing pressures during a COVID-19 outbreak; the service was inspected but not rated and the other four questions were not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 February 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.
Every inspection of Addison Park
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2017Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 December 2016.
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
10 live-in carers within about two hours of Cornwall
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 £1,200 a week. 8 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“He had been a little anxious before she arrived, but has since stated that he would be very happy for her to care for him again”
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.