CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Aquarius Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, March 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind staff and safe medicines, but risks, training, personalised care and oversight were not consistently managed.
Inspectors visited without notice on 5 and 6 December 2022. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records. There were 19 people living in the home at the time.
The home had enough staff, medicines were managed safely, infection controls were suitable and people were generally treated kindly. Staff worked with health professionals, and people enjoyed the food and some activities.
However, inspectors found important problems. Risks from very hot water and pipes had not been dealt with promptly. Some people did not receive baths or showers as often as they wanted. Staff training was incomplete, mental capacity checks were missing, communication support was limited and records and quality checks were not reliable.
The overall rating and all five areas were Requires Improvement. This means the service was not consistently safe, effective, caring, responsive or well-led, and there was an increased risk that people could be harmed.
Medicines
Medicines were stored securely, administered according to prescriptions and checked through regular audits.
“At this inspection, we found medicines had been managed safely and stored securely.” from the report
Health support
The home worked with GPs, district nurses and other professionals. Staff took action when people's health needs changed.
“The GP carried out a weekly visit to the service. Records showed that staff took timely action when people were ill.” from the report
Kind treatment
People and relatives generally said staff were kind. Inspectors saw people looking relaxed and comfortable with staff.
“People and relatives told us staff were kind and caring.” from the report
Food and hydration
People were offered meal choices and food suited to their dietary needs. Records for food and drinks were clear and consistent.
“Meals and drinks were prepared to meet people's preferences and dietary needs.” from the report
Hot water risks
seriousVery high bathroom water temperatures had been reported during November, but action was not taken until inspectors raised the issue. The problem was addressed on the inspection day.
“Records showed extremely high-water temperatures in the bathroom had been reported throughout November 2022. No action had been taken to address this and no warning signs were in place.” from the report
Missing epilepsy risk plans
seriousThere were no risk assessments explaining how to support people with epilepsy safely, including during bathing.
“There were no risk assessments in place relating to people living with epilepsy.” from the report
Incomplete staff training
seriousMany staff had not completed training needed for people's assessed needs. Inspectors were told some staff did not feel confident responding to seizures.
“Epilepsy and continence training had been completed by 7 out of 13 staff, skin care training had been completed by 5 staff and safeguarding people from abuse training had been completed by 11 out of 13 staff.” from the report
Personal care
seriousSome people did not have baths or showers as often as they wanted. Records did not always clearly show what personal care had been provided.
“I would like a shower once a week. I last had one months ago I have to make do with a hand wash.” from the report
Communication support
seriousInformation was not always available in accessible formats. This included a lack of translated complaints information for someone who did not speak English as a first language.
“There was no complaints policy in a different language to help the person who did not speak English as a first language understand how to complain.” from the report
Weak quality checks
seriousAudits failed to identify concerns about safety, mental capacity assessments, training, accessible information and inaccurate care records.
“Registered persons have failed to have effective systems in place to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
- 01What action has been taken to prevent scalding from hot water, pipes and the boiler room, and how is this now checked?
- 02Have all staff completed training for epilepsy, skin care, continence, safeguarding, infection control and fire safety?
- 03How are mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions recorded before any DoLS application is made?
- 04How will you make sure each person receives baths or showers according to their wishes, and that this is recorded accurately?
- 05What translated, visual or easy-read information is now available for menus, complaints and people's communication needs?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and infection prevention and control; it was the first inspection under the new legal entity, with the same management and staff team continuing. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 March 2023 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 Aquarius Care Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- March 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2021Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- October 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 October 2021.
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
91 live-in carers within about an hour of Medway
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 £1,250 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
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.