CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Belmont Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about most infection prevention and control arrangements. They were only somewhat assured about testing because staff did not wait for lateral flow test results before starting work.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control, but staff did not always wait for COVID-19 test results before starting shifts.
This was a targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control measures rather than giving a full service rating.
The home had infection control training, daily temperature checks, suitable protective equipment and regular cleaning. Inspectors were assured about visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, the building and plans for outbreaks.
There was one shortfall. Staff who took a lateral flow test did not wait for the result before starting work. The home took immediate steps to change this, and inspectors signposted further guidance.
Staff infection control training
Staff had training and competency checks covering hand washing and the safe use of protective equipment.
“All staff received competency checks around infection control practices which included good hand washing techniques and use of appropriate PPE.” from the report
Clean environment
The building was clean and uncluttered. Frequently touched areas were cleaned regularly and the work was recorded each day.
“The building looked clean and free from clutter. Appropriate cleaning products were used, to ensured good infection control was maintained.” from the report
Planning for outbreaks
The home had plans to cohort and isolate people if this became necessary. Individual risk assessments were also in place.
“Staff maintained social distance and the service had contingency plans in place to cohort and isolate, should this be needed.” from the report
Testing before shifts
needs fixingStaff who took a lateral flow test did not wait for the result before starting work. Inspectors said this did not follow government guidance, although the home took immediate steps to address it.
“However, when staff completed a lateral flow test, they did not wait for the test result before commencing their shift.” from the report
- 01What immediate steps were taken so staff now wait for lateral flow test results before starting work?
- 02How do you record and check COVID-19 test results for staff and people living in the home?
- 03How often are staff competency checks for hand washing and protective equipment repeated?
- 04How are cleaning records and checks of frequently touched areas reviewed?
- 05How would the home cohort or isolate people if an infection outbreak occurred?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, and the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 March 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, November 2017
Belmont Road was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, but care plans did not always give full guidance.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 19 October 2017. The inspector spoke with four people, staff and the manager, observed care, and checked records about care, medicines, risks, recruitment and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable recruitment checks and regular risk assessments. People were supported with food, drink, health appointments and their legal rights.
Staff treated people with warmth and respect. They asked permission before entering rooms or providing personal care, supported people to make choices and encouraged independence. People could take part in activities, keep in touch with family and use local community facilities.
The main weakness was that care plans were being reviewed and did not contain full details of every person's care and support needs. Staff knew people well and were able to meet their needs. The home remained Good, the same overall rating as at the previous inspection in January 2015.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe and well supported. Staff understood how to report safeguarding concerns.
“We found that people felt safe living at Belmont Road. They told us they liked the staff and felt well supported and cared for.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff asked permission, protected privacy and listened to people's choices. They supported people to be as independent as possible.
“Staff ensured the doors to rooms and areas where personal care was being provided were closed to ensure people's privacy” from the report
Good support and activities
People were supported with nutrition, healthcare, activities and access to the local community. They were also helped to maintain family relationships.
“People enjoyed various activities inside and outside of the service.” from the report
Supportive management
Staff said they felt supported and valued. The management team used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor the service.
“The management team carried out a regular programme of audits to assess and monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
Care plans lacked detail
needs fixingCare plans were being reviewed but did not give full guidance about all the care and support each person needed. Staff knew people well, but written plans should give clear information for staff to follow.
“Whilst we acknowledged that they did not contain detailed information on all of the people's care and support needs, staff were very knowledgeable about the people they supported and were able to meet their needs.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the care plans since the inspection to make sure they give full guidance about each person's needs?
- 02How will you make sure new or temporary staff understand a person's communication methods, risks and preferences?
- 03How do you support people to choose activities and get out into the local community?
- 04How are families kept informed about their relative's health and wellbeing?
- 05How do you check that medicines, risk assessments and personal evacuation plans remain up to date?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and all five ratings were Good; the previous overall rating in January 2015 was also Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 November 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 Belmont Road
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Cambridgeshire
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 £1,020 to £1,200 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
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.