CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 7 Russell Hill
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found personalised risk assessments, enough suitable staff, safe medicines systems and appropriate safeguarding arrangements. The home was clean and accidents and incidents were reviewed so lessons could be learned.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before they moved in, and staff received ongoing training and supervision. Inspectors found that people's health, nutrition and access to healthcare were supported, and that consent and legal safeguards were being managed.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with dignity and respect, and staff supported their choices and independence. Inspectors saw kind, attentive interactions and found that equality and diversity were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- The home provided detailed personalised care plans and helped people take part in activities and maintain family relationships. Inspectors described the service as exceptionally responsive and found that communication needs and complaints were addressed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear leadership, good staff morale and systems for involving people, relatives and staff in the home. Quality checks were carried out and action was taken to improve care.
What inspectors found, December 2019
CareTech Community Services Limited - 7 Russell Hill was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a few areas to keep under review.
This was a planned inspection. One inspector visited on 23 and 29 August 2019, and inspection activity continued until 24 October. The inspector spoke with people using the home, staff, relatives and a visiting professional. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff files, training information and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, good infection control and suitable checks when staff were recruited. They also found that people's health, nutrition, communication, dignity, choices and independence were supported.
The report describes detailed care planning and creative support for activities, relationships and communication. The home was described as exceptionally responsive, although this was still given a rating of Good. The overall rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published on 3 February 2017.
Personalised risk support
Staff identified individual triggers and developed practical ways to reduce risks with people. Inspectors found staff understood people's behaviours and acted before risks developed.
“The registered manager and care workers were thoughtful and proactive when considering the risks to people’s care.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make decisions, build confidence and develop everyday skills. Inspectors saw examples of people becoming more independent with personal care, eating, dressing and activities.
“The provider went to great lengths to encourage people to develop their independent living skills.” from the report
Family relationships and activities
The home worked hard to reduce isolation, support contact with relatives and help people join activities they enjoyed. Achievements were recognised and celebrated.
“The provider went to considerable lengths to help people to avoid social isolation, take part in activities they enjoyed and to stay in touch with their families.” from the report
Communication support
Staff used training and people's individual signs to understand those who could not communicate verbally. Easy-read information was also provided.
“They had used the techniques obtained through this training to work with the person to develop their Makaton signing skills” from the report
Good leadership and involvement
People, relatives and staff were involved in meetings, forums, surveys and newsletters. Inspectors found that the provider monitored the quality of care and acted on what it learned.
“The provider ensured people, staff and their relatives were fully engaged in the running of the service.” from the report
Home larger than current guidance
minorThe home was registered for up to 11 people and was larger than current best practice guidance for this type of service. Inspectors said the building design and surrounding area reduced the negative impact, but families may still want to see whether the size suits their relative.
“The service was a large house, bigger than most domestic style properties.” from the report
Some end of life information outstanding
minorThe home had started asking about people's spiritual and end of life wishes, but was still waiting for responses from some relatives. Families should ask how this information is now recorded and kept up to date.
“The registered manager confirmed they were still waiting for responses to questions from some relatives” from the report
- 01How do you support a new resident to settle in, and how do you check that the placement is right for them?
- 02What communication methods would you use for my relative, and how would you make sure all staff understand them?
- 03How would you identify and manage my relative's individual triggers, behaviours and health risks?
- 04What activities and family contact would you support my relative to maintain or develop?
- 05How are end of life wishes recorded, particularly where relatives have not yet provided all the requested information?
This was a planned comprehensive inspection covering all five rating areas, including the premises and the care provided; inspection activity continued until 24 October 2019. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 December 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
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, respectful and personalised care, with some delays to maintenance work.
This was an unannounced inspection on 14 December 2016. Inspectors spoke with three people, five staff and five relatives by telephone. They also observed care, reviewed three care records and checked staff, medicines, safety and management records.
The home supported up to 10 adults with learning disabilities and autism. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, detailed care plans and good support for people's communication, choices, health and activities.
People were treated with kindness and dignity. Staff knew people's needs well and supported their independence and relationships. The home had a welcoming atmosphere and relatives spoke positively about recent improvements.
The overall rating was Good, and all five areas were rated Good. The home was rated Good at the previous inspection in January 2015. The Effective rating improved because the environment had been refurbished and staff supervision had strengthened.
Safe environment
Inspectors found the home clean and well maintained overall, with regular checks on the building, equipment and fire safety.
“People lived in a safe environment that was clean and well maintained.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff received training relevant to autism, safeguarding, medicines and behaviour support. They understood people's individual needs and communication methods.
“People were supported by staff who knew them well and had the skills and training to meet their needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were attentive and reassuring. People appeared comfortable with them and were supported to keep their privacy, dignity and independence.
“Staff treated people with dignity, respect and kindness.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's routines, preferences, communication needs and goals. People were offered choices about meals, activities and how they spent their time.
“People's plans were personal to them and reflected what was important to the person now, and in the future.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used several audits and checks covering care records, medicines, finances, safety and incidents. Inspectors found that actions were monitored until completion.
“The provider used a range of audits and checks to monitor and assess the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
Some maintenance delays
minorSome relatives felt that planned maintenance had taken too long. Bathroom work was still taking place, and the home provided a plan for completing outstanding repairs after the inspection.
“Some relatives felt that the provider's maintenance programme took too long to deliver.” from the report
Personal information on bedroom doors
minorPeople's personal profiles were displayed outside bedroom doors to help agency staff. Inspectors raised concerns about privacy because the profiles contained personal information, and the manager agreed to review their location.
“We discussed moving these to a more appropriate place as the profiles contained personal information about people.” from the report
Activities to check
minorTwo relatives asked about activities their family members had previously used. The manager said these would be looked into.
“Two relatives raised queries about individual activities their family members used to do.” from the report
- 01Which maintenance work was still outstanding after the inspection, and has it now been completed?
- 02How are personal profiles and other records kept private, especially when agency staff are supporting people?
- 03Are the activities that relatives asked about still available, and how are activities reviewed as people's needs change?
- 04How do you make sure agency or bank staff understand each person's communication needs, routines and behaviour support plan?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in care reviews and decisions about activities, health appointments and daily routines?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions; inspectors could not obtain direct views from some people because of their communication needs. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 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 7 Russell Hill
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Croydon
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 £1,230 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.