CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Canterbury Adult Support Unit
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments and safe medicines systems.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed, and staff had suitable training and support. The home supported people's health, eating and drinking, communication and legal rights.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions about meals, activities, outings, furniture and recruitment.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and records described people's likes, dislikes, communication and signs of distress. People were supported to take part in activities, maintain relationships and use community facilities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive, open and caring culture. Management systems, audits, staff feedback and partnership working supported the quality and safety of the service.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, and the well-led rating improved from Requires Improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 25 July 2019. One inspector spoke with people using the service, a relative, staff and health and social care professionals. They also checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home provides overnight respite stays for up to five people with a learning disability and/or autism. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and involved in decisions about their care, meals and activities.
Staff were trained and described as competent. People received support for complex health needs, took part in activities they chose and were helped to build independence. Medicines, staffing, risk management and quality checks were found to be safe.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The overall rating remained Good. The Well-led rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
Choice and involvement
People were involved in everyday decisions and wider choices about the home. Their views were used to plan meals, activities and future stays.
“People were truly respected, engaged in the service and involved in decisions around their care from choosing what they ate for dinner, what activities they did to the recruitment of new care workers.” from the report
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's assessed needs. The staff team was stable and the home did not use agency care workers.
“There were enough staff to keep people safe as there was always at least two care workers on duty and rotas evidenced enough staff were deployed to meet people's needs in line with their dependency rating assessments.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included detailed information about people's preferences, communication and distress. Staff adapted support to individual health needs and wishes.
“Care records described the support people needed in person centred ways.” from the report
Activities and independence
People were supported to choose outings, use local facilities and develop daily living skills. The home helped people have new experiences and build independence.
“People were enabled to participate in activities within and outside of the service to meet their individual needs and interests.” from the report
Improved leadership
The Well-led rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good. Inspectors found effective audits, strong oversight and a supportive culture.
“At this inspection this key question has now improved to Good.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess whether my relative's health needs can be safely supported during a respite stay?
- 02How do you check compatibility between people staying at the same time?
- 03How will you communicate with my relative, including their preferred pictures, signs or objects of reference?
- 04How will you involve my relative in choosing meals, activities and outings?
- 05What happens if my relative becomes distressed or their needs change during a stay?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with the previous overall rating from January 2017 and the previous Well-led rating of Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 August 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.
What inspectors found, January 2017
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but the home needed to improve its records and oversight.
This was an unannounced inspection on 15 December 2016. Inspectors spoke with four people, five staff and three relatives. They observed care and checked support plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files and quality checks.
The home provided respite stays, day services and personal care for up to five people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found enough skilled staff, safe medicines systems, suitable risk assessments and good support with health, food and personal choices.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Care was tailored to people's needs, interests and communication styles. The overall rating was Good, with Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive all rated Good.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. Some care plans did not give enough detail, and records did not always show staff competency checks or what action had been taken after feedback. The report says the risk to people was minimal because staff knew people well.
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored and given safely by trained staff. Regular checks were used to identify mistakes quickly.
“There were safe processes for storing and administering medicines.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff speaking patiently and kindly with people. People's privacy, dignity and choices were respected.
“People were always spoken to in a dignified and respectful manner; people's choices were listened to and respected.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans included details about people's preferences, communication and activities. Information was also provided in an easy-read format.
“People's individual preferences and needs were supported in a person centred way, and people were given information in a suitable format.” from the report
Staffing and support
Staffing was adjusted to people's needs. Staff had training, supervision and support, and staff morale was reported to be high.
“There were enough staff with the right skills and knowledge to support people.” from the report
Care plans lacked some detail
needs fixingSome plans did not fully explain people's needs or how to support behaviours. New staff might have needed to rely on more experienced colleagues.
“Some of the care plans could be further expanded to help staff understand people better.” from the report
Incomplete management records
needs fixingThe registered manager did not always record staff competency checks or the actions taken after feedback. This made it harder to show that improvements had been completed and reviewed.
“The registered manager had not kept up to date records of when staff had been observed to check their competency.” from the report
- 01How have you expanded care plans so they give new staff enough detail about each person's needs and behaviours?
- 02How do you record and check the competency of new staff before they work alone?
- 03What action have you taken in response to feedback about activities, and how do you check whether the changes worked?
- 04How are staffing levels adjusted when a person's dependency needs change?
- 05How are families kept informed about a person's stay, health and any incidents?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five areas of the service, including care, staffing, medicines, support plans and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 January 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 Canterbury Adult Support Unit
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Canterbury Adult Support Unit →
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Canterbury Adult Support Unit →
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.