CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Canwick Court Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, effective infection control and systems to protect people from abuse. However, records did not always show when as-required medicines had been offered, and some staff were unclear about reporting safeguarding concerns to outside agencies.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- Staff were trained and supported, people received appropriate food and healthcare, and care plans reflected people's needs. However, best-interest decisions were not always recorded, and the environment was not consistently adapted to help people living with dementia find their way around.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff knew people's histories and preferences, involved them in care decisions and supported them compassionately when they became distressed.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. However, access to activities had reduced after the activities worker left, although another staff member was taking on the role.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had regular quality checks, an open culture and systems for learning from incidents. The manager was not yet registered with CQC, but an application had been submitted.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Canwick Court Care Centre was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind care, but some legal decisions and support for people living with dementia needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 30 September 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They reviewed care records, medicines, staffing, training and quality checks.
The home was clean and there were enough staff. People said they felt safe and well cared for. Staff treated people with kindness, respected their privacy and supported their health needs. Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed.
The service was rated Good overall. Safe, caring, responsive and well-led were rated Good. Effective was rated Requires Improvement because best-interest decisions were not always recorded, the building was not consistently adapted for people living with dementia, and activities were limited at the time of the visit.
Clean and safe environment
Inspectors found the home clean and saw staff using infection-control measures. Risk assessments and equipment checks were also in place.
“The home was clean, and staff understood how to prevent and manage infections.” from the report
Enough trained staff
There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff had training, supervision and recruitment checks.
“At this inspection we found there were enough staff available to meet the needs of people.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people as individuals and supported their dignity, choices and emotional needs.
“We saw evidence of caring relationships between staff and people who lived at the home.” from the report
Good healthcare support
Staff made timely referrals and helped people access doctors and other health professionals. Care plans included people's specific health needs.
“Records showed that staff were proactive in their approach and made referrals to health professionals in a timely manner.” from the report
Best-interest decisions
seriousSome decisions for people who could not make them themselves were not properly recorded. The report said this created a risk that decisions might not be in people's best interests.
“There was a risk that decisions were being made which were not in people's best interests.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingRecords did not always show whether as-required medicines had been offered. This meant the records might not match what had actually happened.
“Medicine records did not consistently record when PRN medicines had been offered.” from the report
Dementia-friendly layout
needs fixingThere were few signs using words and pictures to help people living with dementia find their way around. The manager said there were plans to address this.
“The environment was not consistently adapted to support people living with dementia.” from the report
Limited activities
minorPeople did not have access to a full range of activities and leisure pursuits when inspectors visited. The activities worker had recently left, and another staff member was taking on the role.
“At the time of inspection people did not have access to a range of activities and leisure pursuits.” from the report
Manager registration
minorThere was no registered manager in post during the inspection. The current manager had applied to become registered.
“The service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission in post.” from the report
- 01How do you now record best-interest decisions for people who cannot make complex decisions themselves?
- 02How do you check that records show when as-required medicines have been offered?
- 03What changes have been made to signs and other features to help people living with dementia find their way around?
- 04What activities are available now, and how are residents involved in choosing them?
- 05Has the manager's application to become registered with CQC been completed?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, and it looked at both the care provided and the care home premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 November 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, February 2017
Canwick Court Care Centre was rated Good overall; care was kind and responsive, but medicines records and guidance needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 20 December 2016. Inspectors observed care, spoke with nine people, two relatives and staff, and checked care plans, training, audits and medicines records.
People generally felt safe and well cared for. Staff were kind, respected people's choices and supported their health, nutrition, activities and relationships. Care records were personalised and complaints arrangements were clear.
The main weakness was medicines safety. Medicines were given safely, but some records did not match people's allergies and guidance for medicines given when needed was not always in place. Staffing was usually enough, although staff raised concerns about cover and pressure in the downstairs unit.
The home was rated Good overall. It was rated Requires Improvement for Safe, and Good for Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
Kind and respectful care
Staff were observed treating people gently and sensitively. They respected people's privacy, preferences and pace when providing support.
“Staff responded to people in a kind and sensitive manner.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's life histories, preferences and communication needs. Staff used this information to shape daily care.
“Care records were personalised and included detail so that staff could understand what things were important to people such as information about people's past life experiences and their preferences.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff said the management team was approachable. Staff felt able to raise concerns and quality checks led to action plans.
“There were systems and processes in place to check the quality of care and improve the service.” from the report
Medicine records and allergy information
seriousSome medicine-record front sheets gave incorrect allergy information compared with the medication records. This created a risk that someone could receive a medicine they were allergic to.
“We found that six of the information front sheets in the medicine records did not accurately reflect people's allergies.” from the report
Guidance for medicines given when needed
seriousProtocols were missing for some medicines given when needed, including inhalers and painkillers. This meant it was not always clear when they should be given or whether the person could request them.
“Protocols for medicines which are given as required (PRN) such as inhalers and painkillers were not in place for all PRN medicines.” from the report
Staffing pressure in one unit
needs fixingStaff said it could be difficult to support everyone in the downstairs unit when one person needed help or when colleagues were absent. Inspectors observed prompt responses, and the home usually had enough staff.
“They said that it was sometimes difficult when a person required assistance which meant they were unable to be available to the other people or were interrupted because someone else required assistance.” from the report
Limited private space
minorThere were few places other than bedrooms where people could sit quietly and privately. The provider was developing a heated garden room to address this.
“There were few areas available around the home for people to sit quietly and in privacy if they wished to other than their bedrooms.” from the report
- 01How are allergy details checked against medication records before medicines are given?
- 02Are written protocols now in place for every medicine given when needed, including painkillers and inhalers?
- 03How do you cover sickness and holidays in the downstairs unit, and what happens when one person needs extended support?
- 04Has the heated garden room been completed, and can residents use it for private time with visitors?
- 05How are medicine audits now designed to make sure the problems found in this inspection are identified?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led, with observations, interviews and checks of care, staff and medicines records. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 February 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 Canwick Court Care Centre
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 December 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Lincolnshire
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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.