CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Alphonsus House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks were assessed and managed, staff understood safeguarding procedures, staffing met people's needs and recruitment checks had been completed.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating from a comprehensive inspection was used in the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating from a comprehensive inspection was used in the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating from a comprehensive inspection was used in the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Management and quality checks had improved. Staff and relatives felt the home was well managed, and the home used feedback and learning from incidents to improve care.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred support and improved leadership, but some medicines records were incomplete.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 17 December 2019. Two inspectors spoke with nine people, a relative, staff and managers. They looked at care plans, medicines records, incident records, behaviour support plans, quality checks and recruitment records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe was Good, and inspectors found that people felt safe, risks were managed, staffing met people's needs and medicines were given as prescribed. They found a small medicines recording problem because some handwritten records had not been checked and signed by two staff.
Well-led was rated Good and had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection. The home had regular checks on care and medicines, acted on concerns, involved people and staff in giving feedback, and used learning from incidents.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe and inspectors saw that people were comfortable with staff. Staff knew how to report possible abuse or harm.
“People told us they felt safe receiving support from staff.” from the report
Risks were managed
Care plans included guidance for managing risks, including behaviour that could cause harm. Staff could explain the techniques used to support people safely.
“Risks were assessed and managed and staff followed guidance in people's care plans to ensure their safety.” from the report
Enough suitable staff
Inspectors found enough staff to support people at home and when out. Recruitment checks had been carried out to check staff were safe to work with vulnerable people.
“We observed the were enough staff to meet people's care and support needs both within and away from their home.” from the report
Improved management
Leadership improved from Requires Improvement to Good. Managers carried out regular checks, responded to concerns and learned from incidents.
“At this inspection this key question has now improved to good.” from the report
Choice and independence
Support was focused on giving people choice, control and opportunities to gain skills and become more independent.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingSome handwritten medicines administration records had not been signed by two staff. Inspectors said this could increase the risk of medicines errors, and the manager said it would be addressed without delay.
“We noted that where medicine administration records had been handwritten, these had not always been signed by two members of staff.” from the report
- 01What action was taken to make sure handwritten medicines records are checked and signed by two staff?
- 02How are instructions for medicines used only when needed now made clear enough for staff?
- 03How do you check that people's behaviour support plans are followed in practice?
- 04What activities have been added or changed after people asked for a wider range?
- 05How will you share feedback with us about the quality checks and any improvements made?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other key questions were not inspected and their previous comprehensive inspection ratings were used. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 January 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, February 2019
Rated Good overall, but well-led Requires Improvement because checks did not identify problems with the nurse call system and sharing survey actions.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 14 December 2018. One inspector reviewed information, spoke with four people, two relatives and three staff, and checked care records, medicines records and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable training, good support with health and nutrition, kind care, respect for independence and personalised activities.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Well-led. The nurse call system was not always within people's reach in an emergency. Quality checks had not identified this, and actions from previous questionnaires were not routinely shared with people.
The overall rating stayed Good, the same as at the previous inspection published on 22 March 2016. The report says the home would continue to be monitored until the next inspection.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to respond promptly and saw medicines being given as prescribed. Staff had safeguarding training and understood people's risks.
“People were safe and staff received training and knew how to keep them safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were caring and compassionate. People were supported to make their own choices and their privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and interests. People were supported to go out, attend activities and make choices about daily life.
“People's needs were met through good organisation and delivery.” from the report
Good health and nutrition support
People could choose what to eat and drink and received help when needed. The home supported people to access doctors, dentists, opticians and other health professionals.
“People were supported with their health care.” from the report
Nurse call systems
seriousThe nurse call system in some bedrooms was not always within people's reach if they needed help. The manager said this would be resolved quickly, but the home's checks had not identified the problem.
“the nurse call system in people's bedrooms were not always situated in a position people could reach it if they needed to use it to summon help.” from the report
Sharing feedback actions
needs fixingPeople and relatives could complete questionnaires, but the home did not routinely tell them what actions had followed from earlier feedback.
“the provider did not routinely share with people any actions that had resulted from previous questionnaires.” from the report
Accessible information training
minorThe manager and staff did not know about the Accessible Information Standard. Inspectors found that people were nevertheless given information in several different ways, and further training was planned.
“The Accessible Information Standard (AIS) was not known to the registered manager and staff.” from the report
- 01Have all nurse call systems been moved so each person can reach one in an emergency?
- 02How do you now test that nurse call systems are accessible and working?
- 03What actions followed the previous questionnaires, and how are people and relatives told about them?
- 04What further training have staff received about the Accessible Information Standard?
- 05How are people and relatives involved in reviewing their care plans and support?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at all five CQC questions and rated the home overall; the previous overall rating was Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 February 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 Alphonsus House
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 March 2012.
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 Sandwell
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 £950 to £1,190 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
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.