CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Ardenlea Court Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed, staff were recruited safely and enough staff were on duty during the visit. Medicines checks had improved and infection prevention measures were effective.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had suitable induction, training and support. People's dietary, health, communication and legal decision-making needs were assessed and supported.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw respectful interactions, and found that privacy, dignity, independence and personal choices were supported.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records were detailed and up to date, and staff knew people well. Activities, including those for people living with dementia, had improved.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Quality checks and audits had become established since the previous inspection. People and staff gave positive feedback about the leadership and said their views were listened to.
What inspectors found, September 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some end-of-life wishes still being documented.
This was an unannounced inspection on 17 August 2021. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They reviewed care, medicine and recruitment records, along with records about how the home was managed.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found improvements in risk management, medicines, activities for people living with dementia, privacy and quality checks.
People were described as safe, well cared for and treated with kindness and respect. Staff understood people's needs, supported their choices and worked with health professionals. The home had infection prevention measures in place.
The overall rating had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection, published on 3 July 2019. CQC will continue to monitor the information it receives about the home.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw positive relationships and support for privacy and dignity.
“People spoke positively about the staff who supported them. One person said, "Staff are good to us, kind and caring.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included detailed information about people's needs and preferences. Staff knew people's routines, interests and communication styles.
“Care records contained detailed and up to date information to help staff provide the care and support people needed.” from the report
Improved activities
People were happy with the range of activities. Activities for people living with dementia had significantly improved since the previous inspection.
“Activities for people living with dementia had significantly improved since our last inspection.” from the report
Stronger leadership
The home had embedded quality checks and acted on feedback. Staff said communication and teamwork were better organised.
“The providers quality assurance systems had been embedded at the service since our last inspection which demonstrated improvements had been made.” from the report
End-of-life wishes
needs fixingWork was still under way to make sure people's end-of-life wishes were recorded. Families should ask how this is now being completed and reviewed.
“At the time of our visit work was ongoing to ensure people's wishes were documented to help staff provide personalised care to people at the end stage of their life.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure each person's end-of-life wishes are recorded, reviewed and followed?
- 02How many staff are normally on duty for each shift, and how would this change if the home became fuller?
- 03How are medicines checks recorded, and how are any errors followed up?
- 04Which activities are available for people living with dementia, and how are their interests used to plan them?
- 05How are families involved in reviewing their relative's care plan and daily choices?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and infection prevention and control measures. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 September 2021 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, July 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found progress but continuing concerns about risk, dignity, personalised care and leadership.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 23 May 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They observed care and reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and quality checks.
The home had improved since the previous inspection. Staff training, food and drink support, healthcare support and mental capacity practice were rated Good. People generally said they felt safe, enjoyed the food and found staff kind.
However, inspectors found that risks were not always managed consistently. They also found problems with privacy and dignity, incomplete or outdated care records, limited activities for people with dementia, and quality checks that had missed some issues. The overall Requires Improvement rating was the third consecutive rating at this level.
Improved outcomes
The Effective rating improved from Requires Improvement. Inspectors found that people received better support with food, drink, weights, training and healthcare.
“At this inspection improvements had been made. Legal requirements were met.” from the report
Food and drink
People enjoyed meals and were offered drinks and snacks. Staff recorded dietary needs and provided choices such as halal meat and vegetarian food.
“People enjoyed the food. During our visit mealtime experiences were overall, positive for people.” from the report
Kind staff
Most people and relatives spoke positively about staff. Staff knew people well and encouraged independence where possible.
“Most people and relatives were complimentary about the level of care shown by staff.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The management team investigated accidents and incidents and shared lessons with staff to try to prevent problems happening again.
“The provider and their management team demonstrated commitment to learning lessons when things went wrong.” from the report
Risk and equipment
seriousSome equipment was not set up or fitted correctly. This created potential risks of skin damage or injury, although inspectors said no harm had occurred.
“The risks we identified had not caused harm to people the potential they created was a concern to us.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingSome records for medicines given when needed and prescribed creams were incomplete. Fridge temperatures were also not recorded, so safe storage could not be confirmed.
“Overall, staff followed good medicines practice, but some medicine records had not been completed in line with the requirements of the provider's procedure.” from the report
Privacy and dignity
needs fixingStaff entered bedrooms without knocking, including during personal care. Inspectors also found that continence needs were not always handled in a way that protected dignity.
“People's right to privacy was not always respected.” from the report
Personalised care records
needs fixingA person who had arrived the day before the inspection did not have a care plan in place. Other records were not always up to date or clear about people's involvement.
“A care plan for one person who had moved into the home the day before our visit was not in place.” from the report
Dementia activities and support
needs fixingActivities were limited for people living in the dementia unit. Inspectors also saw one person calling for help when staff were not present to offer reassurance.
“In contrast activities for people living within the dementia unit were limited.” from the report
Complaints and checks
needs fixingSome complaints had not been resolved. Some audits also failed to identify problems that inspectors found, so the home's checking systems were not yet reliable.
“However, following our visit we were made aware complaints had not always been resolved.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that air mattresses and bedrail bumpers are fitted and used correctly?
- 02How are medicines records, 'as required' medicine protocols, cream application records and medicine fridge temperatures checked?
- 03How do you make sure new residents have a personalised care plan immediately after moving in?
- 04What activities are now available for people living with dementia, and how do you make sure everyone can take part?
- 05How are complaints tracked to make sure they are fully resolved and the outcome is shared?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and both the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 July 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 Ardenlea Court Care Home
5 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2021Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 November 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Solihull
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. 9 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.