CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Carville Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- The inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment and safe medicines practice. Risks were assessed and reviewed, and systems were in place to safeguard people and learn from accidents or incidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's care, nutrition and healthcare needs were being met. Staff received relevant training and understood consent, best-interest decisions and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, compassionate and respectful. People were involved in their care, supported to be independent and treated with dignity.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised to people's health, social and cultural needs. People had access to meaningful activities, support to maintain relationships and communication in formats they could understand.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The inspectors found a caring, person-centred culture and effective checks on quality. Staff said managers were approachable and supportive, and feedback was gathered from people, relatives, staff and professionals.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and well-managed care, with all five areas rated Good.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 19 December 2019. One inspector spoke with six people living at the home, one relative, the manager and four staff members. They observed care, reviewed two people's care records and checked safety and management records.
The inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice and systems to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. They found that people's care was personalised, staff were kind and respectful, and people were supported to make choices, stay independent and take part in activities.
The home had systems to monitor quality and respond to accidents, incidents and complaints. All five areas were rated Good, meaning the inspectors found consistently good care and management at the time of this inspection. The previous inspection, published in June 2017, had also rated the home Good.
Safe medicines
The inspectors found that medicines were managed safely and records showed people received them as prescribed.
“Medicines were managed safely. Medicines records were completed and showed people had received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff showed compassion and protected people's privacy, dignity and independence.
“Staff demonstrated a kind and caring attitude during their interactions with people. Staff were compassionate and offered reassurance to people when this was required.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could take part in activities that matched their interests and were supported to attend social events and maintain relationships.
“Meaningful activities were available for people. Staff explored opportunities for people which were relevant to them and their likes.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The manager and provider used audits, checks and action plans to monitor the service and make improvements.
“Quality assurance systems were in place. Audits and checks were completed by the registered manager and provider to monitor the quality of the service and drive improvements.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and review my relative's needs and update their care plan when those needs change?
- 02What activities and social events would be suitable for my relative, and how would staff support them to take part?
- 03What training and supervision do staff receive for supporting people with acquired brain injuries?
- 04How would you involve my relative and our family in care decisions and reviews?
- 05How would you handle a complaint or concern, and how would you tell us the outcome?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, the care provided and the home environment. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 February 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, June 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with staff appraisals needing to be brought up to date.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 11 May 2017. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, staff, relatives and external professionals. They observed care, checked medicines, and reviewed care records, training, recruitment and management records.
The inspectors found all five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. The home was clean, secure and well maintained. There were enough staff, medicines were managed safely, and staff had training for people's acquired brain injury needs.
People were treated with kindness and involved in their care plans and goals. Staff supported people with rehabilitation, activities, health care and developing independence. The home worked with families and outside professionals and had systems to check the quality of care.
The previous inspection in March 2015 had made a recommendation about following the Mental Capacity Act. At this inspection, the inspectors found the home was working within its principles.
Kind and knowledgeable staff
People and relatives described staff as caring. Inspectors found that staff knew people's individual needs, preferences and backgrounds well.
“Staff had developed strong, caring relationships with the people they supported and were very knowledgeable about their individual needs, likes and dislikes.” from the report
Safe staffing
The home used a staffing assessment tool and people said staff were available when needed. This also allowed flexibility for community activities.
“The provider used a staffing assessment tool to ensure there were sufficient staff deployed.” from the report
Specialist training
Staff received an induction, regular training and specialist training for people's needs, including support with suction and PEG feeding.
“The provider's computerised training record showed that staff training was 100% up to date in line with the provider's expectations.” from the report
Annual appraisals were overdue
needs fixingAnnual staff appraisals had not taken place in line with the provider's policy. A timetable had been created to complete them within a short timeframe.
“annual appraisals had not occurred as the providers policy stated, but we saw that there was a timetable already in place to ensure these were updated” from the report
- 01Have all staff annual appraisals now been completed, and how are future appraisals tracked?
- 02How would the home assess and support my relative's specific acquired brain injury needs before they move in?
- 03What individual rehabilitation goals would be set, and how would my relative and family be involved in reviewing progress?
- 04How does the home manage incidents involving behaviour that challenges, and how are lessons shared with staff?
- 05How would the home support a planned move to more independent living or another service if my relative's needs changed?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five areas of the service, including care, medicines, staffing, records and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 June 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 Carville Road
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 July 2014.
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
30 live-in carers within about an hour of North Tyneside
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 £950 to £1,130 a week. 26 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.