CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Care Assist in Harrow (Whitehall Road)
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors found problems with guidance and recording for medicines given when needed. Other safety arrangements, staffing, recruitment, fire safety, infection control and risk assessments were described as appropriate.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and reviewed, and staff had suitable training and support. The home met people's dietary and healthcare needs, although care plans lacked detail about some people's oral care support.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were patient, respectful and friendly. People appeared at ease, and staff supported privacy, dignity, independence and individual communication needs.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was planned around people's needs and preferences. People had individual activity timetables, accessible information and support to maintain relationships and take part in social and cultural activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open and inclusive culture. Management knew people's needs, staff felt supported, and audits and feedback systems were used to monitor and improve care.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Good overall, but inspectors found medicines management was not always safe and rated Safe Requires Improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 3 March 2020. One inspector observed care, met all six people living in the home, spoke with three people and staff, and checked care, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
The overall rating was Good. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. Staff were described as kind, respectful and knowledgeable. People appeared comfortable, received personalised support and were helped to take part in activities and use the local community.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found missing or hard-to-find instructions for medicines given when needed. Records did not always show why these medicines were given, and checks of medicines records were not recorded. The manager provided the missing protocols after the inspection.
The previous overall rating was Good, published in October 2017. Safe had fallen from Good to Requires Improvement, while the other four question ratings remained Good.
Kind and respectful staff
Staff treated people warmly and respectfully. People appeared relaxed with staff and received support in a considerate way.
“Staff adopted a caring, friendly and professional approach in their work.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's routines, preferences, communication needs and support strategies. Staff also knew people well in day-to-day practice.
“Care was planned around people's individual needs and choices.” from the report
Good staffing and training
The home had enough staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks, training, supervision and induction arrangements were in place.
“Enough staff were deployed to safely meet the needs of people.” from the report
Positive management
Staff described good teamwork and felt able to speak openly with management. The home used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor care.
“The service had an open and inclusive culture. The home was managed effectively.” from the report
Medicines given when needed
seriousAt the inspection, there was no clear guidance explaining when and how to give one person's medicines prescribed for use when needed. Records also did not show why these medicines had been given.
“At the time of the inspection we found no protocol providing guidance to advise staff on when and how to give these medicines.” from the report
Medicines checks were not recorded
needs fixingSenior staff checked medicines weekly, but the checks did not include a recorded check of the medicines administration records. The manager said this would be documented in future.
“We discussed this with the registered manager who confirmed that such checks would be documented in future.” from the report
Oral care plans
needs fixingThe report says care plans did not contain enough information about people's oral care needs or the support they required. The provider was asked to follow best practice guidance.
“We noted that care support plans lacked information about people's oral care needs and details of the support people required to meet their needs.” from the report
- 01What clear protocols are now kept with the medicines records for medicines given when needed?
- 02How do you record the reason each medicine given when needed was administered?
- 03Are medicines administration records now checked and is that check documented?
- 04How have you improved care plans to record each person's oral care needs and required support?
- 05What was done to secure the fridge used for storing the inhaler medicine?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home's premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 April 2020 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, October 2017
Care Assist in Harrow (Whitehall Road) is Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring support, with some medicine recording errors.
Inspectors visited on 30 August 2017. They spoke with people using the home, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked records, medicines, staffing, training and management systems. Six people were living there, which is the home's maximum capacity.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and well cared for. Inspectors found good risk assessments, safe medicine arrangements, clean surroundings, suitable training and detailed care plans.
The home had improved since earlier inspections. Staff supervision was now recorded regularly, care plans had been redesigned, and the necessary DoLS authorisations were in place. Inspectors did find some gaps and errors in medicine administration records, although the home had identified and discussed them.
Safety and safeguarding
Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse. Individual risks, including anxiety, self-injury and challenging behaviour, had been assessed and reviewed.
“Care workers demonstrated a good understanding of how to recognise and report allegations of abuse.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
People appeared relaxed with staff and were treated with kindness, patience and respect. Their privacy and dignity were understood and supported.
“All staff interacted positively with people, showing them kindness, patience and respect.” from the report
Management checks
The home carried out regular checks across several areas and used them to improve the service. Staff described management as approachable and supportive.
“Management monitored the quality of the service and we saw evidence that regular audits and checks had been carried out to improve the service.” from the report
Medicine records
needs fixingInspectors found some gaps and errors in the medicine administration records. The home said the medicines had been given and that the errors had been identified through weekly audits, but accurate recording still needs checking.
“We noted that there were some gaps and errors in the records we looked at and spoke with the deputy manager about this.” from the report
- 01What changes were made after inspectors found gaps and errors in the medicine administration records?
- 02How do you now check that every medicine given is recorded correctly?
- 03Has the remaining staff vacancy mentioned in the report been filled, and how are staffing levels managed when people need appointments or day trips?
- 04Are all current DoLS authorisations and applications up to date for the people living here?
- 05How are people's monthly care plan reviews, activities and personal preferences recorded now?
This inspection considered all five CQC questions; it also noted improvements found since the October 2015 inspection and the focused inspection in March 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 October 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 Care Assist in Harrow (Whitehall Road)
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Care Assist in Harrow (Whitehall Road) →
- October 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Care Assist in Harrow (Whitehall Road) →
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodEffective: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Harrow
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 £1,330 a week. 81 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult 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.