CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Anderida
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found robust arrangements for safeguarding, risk management, medicines, staffing, recruitment, fire safety and infection control. Incidents had been reviewed and action had been taken to reduce the chance of them happening again.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supervised, and people's health, nutrition and communication needs were monitored. The environment had been adapted to help people move around and live more independently.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with compassion, kindness, privacy and respect. Inspectors saw staff taking time to communicate in ways that suited each person and support their choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. People were supported with activities, relationships, communication and decision-making, and the complaints process was available in an accessible format.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive culture, regular staff meetings and audits, and clear leadership. The manager worked with healthcare professionals, commissioners, relatives and advocates.
What inspectors found, April 2018
Anderida: Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with legal authorisations still awaiting approval.
This was an unannounced inspection on 9 February 2018. Two inspectors met the two people living at the home, spoke with staff and the registered manager, and contacted healthcare professionals and commissioners. They also checked care plans, medicine records, daily notes and audits.
Inspectors found that people were safe, received their medicines properly and had enough staff to support them. Staff knew people well and understood their communication needs, including dual sensory loss. The home was clean and well maintained, and risks and incidents were reviewed.
People were treated kindly and supported to make choices and build independence. Their care was personalised, with activities based on their likes and dislikes. The manager and staff were described as supportive, well organised and committed to improving the service.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The overall Good rating remained unchanged from the previous inspection.
Good staffing and safety
There were enough staff, including access to additional staff if needed. Recruitment checks, risk assessments, medicine systems and safety checks were in place.
“There continued to be enough staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and adapted their communication. They supported privacy, dignity, choice and independence.
“We observed staff taking the time to have meaningful interactions with people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's histories, preferences and communication methods. Activities, meals and the environment were adapted to individual needs.
“People received personalised care in line with their needs. Activities were planned around people's known likes and dislikes.” from the report
Good health support
Staff worked with health professionals and followed guidance about eating, drinking and communication. People were supported to attend health appointments and stay well.
“People were supported to eat and drink safely.” from the report
Authorisations were still pending
minorThe manager had applied for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards for the people living at the home, but these had not been authorised at the time of inspection.
“The registered manager had applied for DoLS for people living at the service, but these had not yet been authorised.” from the report
- 01What is the current position of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications, and have they now been authorised?
- 02How would staffing levels change if one person's needs increased or extra support was needed?
- 03How do you record and review the ways each person communicates pain, distress or preferences?
- 04How are relatives and advocates involved in care reviews and important decisions?
- 05Which activities and communication sessions are currently available for each person?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; inspectors met both people living at the home, spoke with staff and professionals, and sampled care and service records. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 April 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 Anderida
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 December 2010.
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 Kent
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 £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.