CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Atkinson Grove Chance for a Break Service
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks, safeguarding, staffing, infection control and medicines were managed safely. The home also learned from accidents and incidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed and reviewed before each stay. Staff were trained and supported, and people received help with food, health and appointments.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff knew people well and had formed positive relationships with them and their families. Privacy, dignity, independence and emotional needs were supported.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was planned around people's preferences, communication needs, interests and relationships. Families knew how to complain and said they felt able to raise concerns.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found approachable management, clear responsibilities and effective checks on quality and safety. People, families and staff were encouraged to give their views.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred respite care, with some sensory improvements still needed.
This was a planned inspection on 10 March 2020. One inspector met all three people using the home, observed their care, spoke with family members and reviewed care, medicines, staffing, training and quality records.
The home provides short-term respite care for up to four adults with a learning disability. Inspectors rated all five areas Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
Inspectors found that people were protected from harm, received suitable care from trained staff, and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Their choices, communication needs, health, interests and independence were supported.
The main shortfall was that the home lacked colour and interesting items for people with sensory needs. The manager said there were plans to improve this. The previous overall rating was also Good, published on 27 September 2017.
Safe care and medicines
Risks were assessed and managed, staff recruitment checks were completed, and medicines were stored and given safely.
“Medicines were stored and used safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people well and supported their emotional needs, privacy, dignity and independence.
“People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff understood and supported people's emotional needs.” from the report
Personalised support
People and relevant others were involved in care planning. Staff supported communication, hobbies, community links and individual choices.
“There was a person-centred approach to planning people's care and support.” from the report
Good management
The home had regular checks, staff meetings and opportunities to learn and improve. Families and staff described managers as supportive and approachable.
“Quality assurance systems were in place and used effectively to monitor the quality and safety of the service and make improvements.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What changes have been made, or are planned, to improve colour and sensory items in the home?
- 02How will you support my relative's preferred way of communicating during their stay?
- 03How will you manage my relative's medicines, and what checks take place when they arrive?
- 04How will you support my relative to follow their hobbies, maintain community links and make daily choices?
- 05How will you involve our family in reviewing care before and after each short stay?
This was a planned inspection covering all five key questions, and the care and premises were both looked at. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 April 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, September 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised respite care across all five areas.
The inspection took place over three days. The first visit was unannounced. Inspectors observed care, spoke with a person using the home, staff and the manager, talked by telephone with relatives of five people, and checked four people's care and medicine records.
The home provides short-term respite care for adults with a learning disability. Inspectors found that risks were assessed, staffing was sufficient, medicines were given safely, and staff understood safeguarding. People received suitable food and drink, support with health needs, and care from trained staff.
Inspectors found staff to be kind and respectful. They understood people's communication, routines and preferences, and supported people to make choices and remain as independent as possible. The home had accessible information, a complaints process and regular checks on quality.
The home was rated Good in every area: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. It was also rated Good at the previous inspection in March 2015, so the overall rating remained Good.
Safety planning
Risks were identified when people first used the home and reviewed before each stay. Plans were updated when people's needs changed.
“Risks people faced were identified and planned for when they first began to use the service.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff understood people's needs and communication, including when people could not speak. They supported privacy, dignity and emotional wellbeing.
“People were treated with dignity and respect and their privacy was promoted.” from the report
Personalised support
People were offered choices and encouraged to be independent. Care plans included their routines, interests and preferred ways to spend their time.
“People received person centred care. Staff were observed offering people choices, asking their opinion and encouraging people to be as independent as possible.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Staff responsible for medicines were trained and checked. Medicines and records were checked by two staff at the start of each stay.
“Medication and medication administration records (MARs) for each person were checked by two staff at the beginning of each person's stay.” from the report
Regular management checks
The manager checked care records, the environment, equipment and staff performance. Feedback was collected from people and relatives.
“The quality of the service was regularly checked to make sure that people received safe and effective care and support.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you check and update my relative's care and risk plans before each stay?
- 02How will you support my relative's usual routines, hobbies, communication and preferred activities?
- 03How will you manage and check my relative's medicines when they arrive for a stay?
- 04What training and support do staff have for my relative's specific needs, including communication and dietary needs?
- 05How can our family give feedback or raise a complaint, and how will you keep us informed of the outcome?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five questions; the report says the Good rating remained unchanged from March 2015. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 September 2017 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 Atkinson Grove Chance for a Break Service
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Atkinson Grove Chance for a Break Service →
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Atkinson Grove Chance for a Break Service →
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Knowsley
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. 91 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.