CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Boldmere Drive
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and staff understood their risks and safeguarding duties. Medicines, health and safety checks, and recruitment checks were in place, although staff were sometimes rushed and staffing arrangements were under review.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff knew people's needs and had training for their roles. People received healthcare support, enough food and drink, and support to make decisions in line with the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff supported people's emotional needs, privacy, dignity, independence and involvement in everyday decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's preferences, communication needs and wishes. People could follow their routines and interests, attend day services and raise complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff were involved and spoke positively about the service. The provider carried out quality checks and had systems for sharing information and responding to concerns.
What inspectors found, July 2018
Boldmere Drive was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, but staff were sometimes rushed while staffing arrangements were being changed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 12 June 2018. One inspector observed care, spoke with three people, a relative, staff and others, and checked care, recruitment, medicines and safety records.
The home supports four people with learning disabilities and autism. Inspectors found that people felt safe, staff knew them well, medicines were managed safely and people received support with health, food, activities and communication.
People were treated with kindness and respect. They were supported to make choices, stay independent and follow their own routines. The home had systems for complaints, staff feedback and checking the quality of care.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the first inspection since the provider's registration changed in June 2017. The service had previously also been rated Good under its former registration.
People felt safe
People and a relative told inspectors that people were safe. Staff understood people's risks and how to report possible abuse.
“All feedback we received reflected people were safe living at the home.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw good relationships between people and staff. Staff offered reassurance and supported people's privacy and dignity.
“People were treated with kindness and respect and had good relationships with staff.” from the report
Personal choice and independence
People helped with everyday tasks, chose meals and activities, and were supported to make decisions in ways they could understand.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives” from the report
Good health support
Staff arranged healthcare appointments and followed advice from health professionals. People were supported with food, drink and healthy diets.
“People were supported to access healthcare support as needed.” from the report
Responsive to individual needs
Care plans included people's preferences, communication methods and important risks. Staff supported routines, outings and interests in the community.
“People received a service that responded to their needs and wishes.” from the report
Staff sometimes felt rushed
needs fixingStaff vacancies and annual leave meant people had often been supported by one staff member. Inspectors saw a staff member unable to give one upset person their full time while also responding to others.
“We saw a staff member was rushed at times” from the report
Some monitoring records were unclear
minorInspectors asked the registered manager to improve the clarity of records relating to one agreed approach when a person became unsettled.
“monitoring records relating to this were not always clear” from the report
Care records were being updated
minorThe provider was working through changes after the registration change, with a focus on making sure care records were updated.
“one focus at the time of the inspection was to ensure care records had been updated accordingly.” from the report
- 01What are the current staffing levels, and has the staff team reached the planned full complement?
- 02How do you make sure people receive enough one-to-one attention when someone is upset or several people need help at once?
- 03What changes have been made to improve the clarity of monitoring records?
- 04Have all care records been updated following the change in provider registration?
- 05How are people's preferred activities, outings and day-service links supported when staffing is under pressure?
This was an unannounced inspection that assessed all five CQC questions and the overall quality and safety of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 July 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 Boldmere Drive
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- July 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 March 2017.
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 Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“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.