CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Cardell House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe and staff understood safeguarding procedures. Staffing was considered sufficient, but two medicines records had not been signed and the rota did not match timesheets.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and understood people's needs. Staff supervision was provided, although not all supporting evidence was available during the inspection and was sent afterwards.
- Caring?
- Good
- People described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw calm, respectful support and found that cultural, spiritual and personal needs were recorded and supported.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area had improved from the previous inspection. People had access to activities they chose, including community visits, and care plans described their routines, preferences and support needs.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had regular quality audits, staff meetings and systems for reporting incidents and notifications. Inspectors found supportive leadership and a clear person-centred approach.
What inspectors found, October 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care and improvements in activities, but some medicines records were incomplete.
This was an unannounced inspection on 11 September 2018. Inspectors spoke with six people living at the home, staff, the registered manager and a visiting health professional. They also checked care plans, staff records, medicines records, complaints, accidents and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were described as feeling safe and treated kindly. Staff understood people's needs, supported their choices and helped them enjoy activities, meals and community visits.
Inspectors found that care plans were current and that staff training and management checks had improved. However, two medicines administration records had gaps, and the rota did not clearly match staff timesheets. These issues were raised with the registered manager.
Kind relationships
People spoke positively about staff, and inspectors saw warm, calm and respectful interactions.
“People told us how kind and caring staff were and how well their individual needs were met.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans were up to date and included people's routines, preferences, relationships and support needs.
“Care plans set out how to meet needs and were up to date.” from the report
Activities and community life
The home had improved its support for activities and access to the community since the previous inspection.
“At this inspection we found that people enjoyed a varied lifestyle, which included activities, events and tasks that they wanted to do.” from the report
Staff training
Staff had training relevant to the needs of people living at the home, including learning disability, epilepsy and behaviour that challenges.
“People were cared for by staff who had completed training in subjects which were relevant to their needs.” from the report
Quality checks
The registered manager and provider carried out audits and used them to identify improvements, including reviewing care plans.
“These identified when action was required.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingTwo medicines administration records had gaps for the previous day. The medicines appeared to have been given, but the records had not been signed.
“In two cases, gaps were found in records for administration of medicines for the previous day.” from the report
Staffing records
minorThe rota showed different shift times from the timesheets. The registered manager agreed to correct the rota so the working arrangements were clear.
“The staff rota described the morning shift as finishing at 2.00.pm and the afternoon shift commencing at 3.00.pm however timesheets for staff recorded the morning shift as finishing at 3.00.pm.” from the report
Supervision evidence
minorNot all evidence showing that staff had been properly supervised was available during the inspection. The provider later sent further information.
“On the day of our visit not all of the evidence to show staff were properly supervised was available to us .” from the report
- 01How do you check that every dose of medicine is recorded and that gaps in medicines administration records are followed up?
- 02What changes were made to the staff rota after inspectors found that it did not match the timesheets?
- 03How often are staff supervision and appraisal records checked to make sure they are complete?
- 04What activities and community visits are currently available for my relative, and how are their preferences recorded?
- 05How will you keep me informed about any changes to my relative's care plan or support needs?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating; the Responsive rating improved from February 2016, while the other ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 October 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 Cardell House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Bristol, City of
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 £1,300 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She became a good friend to my mother in law, chatting with her, dancing with her, knitting with her and the list goes on”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.