CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 5 and 6 Augusta Close
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was following infection prevention and control guidance. This included visitor checks, social distancing, use of protective equipment, testing and cleaning.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this inspection.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection prevention and control measures.
Inspectors visited the home on 28 October 2020. The visit was announced and formed part of a CQC review of infection prevention and control in care homes.
They found good practice in managing visitors, social distancing, personal protective equipment, testing and cleaning. Visitors had health checks and temperatures taken, and visits took place by appointment in a designated clean room.
The home was inspected but not rated. The report says inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, but it does not provide ratings for the other areas of care.
Visitor safety checks
Visitors completed a health questionnaire and had their temperature taken before entering.
“Staff ensured that any visitors to the service, both social and professional visitors, completed a questionnaire regarding their current health and had their temperature taken.” from the report
Safer visiting arrangements
Visits were arranged in advance in a designated clean room. Visitors wore protective equipment, and the room was disinfected afterwards.
“These visits were made by appointment only and visitors wore full (personal protective equipment) PPE such as a face mask and followed the service's visitor guidance.” from the report
Social distancing
The building used signs, floor markings and separate entrances to help people keep apart. Staff and residents in the two services also stayed separate.
“The building was clearly marked with 2 metre signs and floor markings to ensure that people were reminded to keep a 2 metre distance.” from the report
Protective equipment and testing
Inspectors were assured that protective equipment was being used safely and that testing was available for residents and staff.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have the infection prevention and control arrangements changed since the inspection on 28 October 2020?
- 02How are visitors currently screened, and how are visits arranged and cleaned afterwards?
- 03How do staff keep the two services separate, and do staff work across both services now?
- 04What testing and protective equipment are currently available for residents and staff?
- 05Can you show us the latest ratings or inspection information covering care, medicines, staffing and activities?
This was an announced thematic review focused on infection prevention and control under the Safe question; it was inspected but not rated and did not cover the other main areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 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, December 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with end-of-life planning still being developed.
This was a comprehensive, announced inspection on 13 November 2018. One inspector observed care, spoke with two people, the manager and two support workers, and reviewed care plans, training records, audits and other documents.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough skilled staff, safe medicines management, suitable training, kind treatment and support for people's choices, independence, health, activities and friendships.
The rating had not changed since the previous inspection in April 2016. Inspectors found no evidence of serious risks or concerns. End-of-life planning was being developed gradually, and a previous medicines-recording issue had been addressed through a new checking method.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff with the right skills, including extra one-to-one support when needed.
“We could see that people were supported by sufficient numbers of staff who had the right skills mix to support them and keep them safe.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, take reasonable risks and remain as independent as possible.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible” from the report
Kind care
Staff treated people with respect and kindness, knew them well and supported their privacy and dignity.
“This showed us that people were looked after and cared for in a kind and considerate way.” from the report
Community life
People were helped to continue with activities, friendships, day centres, trips and interests outside the home.
“People continued to be supported by staff to access the community and follow their interests.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's likes, dislikes, preferences and changing needs. People were involved in reviewing them.
“We saw comprehensive and individualised care plans which detailed, for example, people's likes, dislikes and preferences.” from the report
Previous medicines recording errors
minorAn earlier audit found minor errors on medicines administration records. The home introduced colour coding, and inspectors said the improvement had been followed through.
“A previous medication audit had found minor errors in recording on the medication administration record (MAR) chart.” from the report
- 01How are individual end-of-life plans being completed, and how will the person and their family be involved?
- 02What checks are now used to make sure medicines administration records remain accurate?
- 03How do you decide when someone needs extra one-to-one staff support?
- 04How will you support the person to keep their interests, friendships and activities outside the home?
- 05How often will the person's care plan be reviewed with them and, where agreed, their relatives?
This was an announced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions; the inspector observed care, spoke with two people and reviewed two care plans and service records. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 December 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 5 and 6 Augusta Close
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Peterborough
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 £1,370 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I honestly feel lucky to have found her and have already booked her for another visit.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.