CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Butterfly House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines processes and effective infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff supported people's health, nutrition, independence and communication. Inspectors found that reviews of restrictions and some records about future goals needed to be stronger.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with warmth, dignity and respect. Staff understood individual preferences, supported independence and involved people in everyday decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- People took part in varied activities and received personalised support. Some care records were not updated after reviews, although staff understood the information they needed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The service had a person-centred culture, regular audits and good teamwork. Inspectors noted that the home should maintain a distinct identity from the provider's day services and that some relatives found the registered manager busy.
What inspectors found, January 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with some records and review processes needing improvement.
This was the first inspection since the service registered. Inspectors visited on 22 November, 24 November and 5 December 2022. They met the four people living there, spoke with relatives and staff, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
Inspectors found people were relaxed and happy. Staff knew people well, supported their communication and choices, helped them take part in activities, and worked with health professionals. Relatives gave positive feedback about the care.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found consistently good care and management at the time of the inspection, although they identified areas for improvement.
Kind and respectful care
People appeared relaxed and happy. Staff showed warmth, respected privacy and dignity, and used their knowledge of people's needs to reduce anxiety.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Safe support
Inspectors found effective safeguarding, risk management, staffing, recruitment, medicines and infection control arrangements.
“There were effective systems to help keep people safe.” from the report
Choice and activities
People were supported to make everyday choices, develop independence and enjoy activities in the home and local community.
“People had busy lives and engaged in numerous activities.” from the report
Good communication
Staff understood how people communicated and adapted information to suit their needs. Training was arranged to improve communication using signs.
“Staff had good awareness, skills and understanding of individual communication needs.” from the report
Health support
Staff worked with relatives and health professionals to support people's wellbeing, including helping someone attend a specialist dental appointment.
“Staff supported people holistically to maintain their health and wellbeing.” from the report
Reviews of restrictions
needs fixingThe service used cameras in shared lounge areas, but did not have a system to keep this decision under review. Inspectors recommended reviewing restrictions and ensuring they remain necessary and in people's best interests.
“However, there was no systems to ensure this decision was kept under review.” from the report
Care records
needs fixingSome records did not clearly set out people's future goals, skills teaching or the outcomes from care reviews. Staff generally knew the information, but the written records needed updating.
“Care records for Butterfly House had not always been adapted after the reviews, for example, with the outcomes each person was working to.” from the report
Access to the manager
minorSome relatives worried about disturbing the registered manager because they seemed very busy. The manager was gradually giving another staff member more responsibility to help respond to queries.
“We had some feedback from relatives that they were worried about disturbing the registered manager as they were so busy.” from the report
- 01How often do you now review the use of cameras and other restrictions, and how are families involved in those reviews?
- 02How do you record each person's goals, independence skills and progress after care reviews?
- 03How will you make sure Butterfly House remains a distinct home rather than being linked too closely to the provider's day services?
- 04Who should families contact when the registered manager is busy, and how quickly will queries be answered?
- 05How do you support people to become more independent with their medicines where this is suitable?
This was the first comprehensive inspection of the newly registered care home and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 January 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 Butterfly House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- January 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 September 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
51 live-in carers within about an hour of Southend-on-Sea
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 £960 to £1,200 a week. 44 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
“She was always cheerful and looking for ways to stimulate my mother. She became her "friend" and provided best care always.”
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.