CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Cedar Bungalows
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, medicines were given as prescribed, and infection-control arrangements were in place. Some recruitment records were incomplete for staff transferred from a previous provider.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care assessments were detailed and involved relatives and health professionals. Staff received training and people were supported with food, health care, choices and least restrictive care. The section also contains the wording that the service was “not always effective”, despite the Good rating and positive detailed findings.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were described as kind, compassionate and respectful. People were involved in decisions, and their privacy, dignity and independence were promoted.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and reviewed. People were supported to communicate, maintain relationships, follow interests and take part in activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear leadership, an open culture and good teamwork. Audits and meetings were used to monitor quality, respond to incidents and improve support.
What inspectors found, August 2021
Cedar Bungalows is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a recruitment-record shortfall to check.
This was the home’s first inspection since registering with CQC. It was unannounced and took place on 8 July 2021. The inspector observed care, spoke with staff, a relative and health professionals, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and quality records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were safe, medicines were managed properly, staff knew people well, and care was planned around individual needs.
There was one shortfall in recruitment records for some staff who had transferred from a previous provider. They had only provided a ten-year employment history rather than a full employment history. After the inspection, the manager said an audit had been completed and further information requested.
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated people with compassion and supported their dignity, privacy and independence.
“Staff were kind and caring. They engaged meaningfully with people, spoke in a respectful way and treated them with compassion.” from the report
Safe medicines systems
Medicines were given as prescribed. Records, storage, ordering and audits were checked and found to be well managed.
“There were systems in place to manage ordering, storage and disposal of medicines.” from the report
Personalised support
Care was planned around each person’s needs, choices, communication and interests. Relatives and health professionals were involved.
“People received care and support that was tailored to and responsive to their individual needs.” from the report
Team leadership
Inspectors found an open culture, supportive teamwork and regular checks on safety and quality.
“Regular, effective checks and audits were completed to monitor the safety and quality of service provided.” from the report
Incomplete recruitment histories
needs fixingSome staff recruited by the previous provider had only supplied a ten-year employment history. The manager said a full audit had been completed and further histories requested, but inspectors planned to check this again.
“This was not in line with current recruitment guidance.” from the report
- 01Has every staff file now got a full employment history, including the staff who transferred from the previous provider?
- 02What did the audit of recruitment files find, and has CQC since checked the changes?
- 03How will you make sure staffing remains consistent when people go out or attend appointments?
- 04How are relatives and health professionals involved when a person’s care plan or risks change?
- 05What improvements to the bungalows and garden were planned, and have these been completed?
This was the first inspection of the newly registered home and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control arrangements for COVID-19. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 August 2021 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 Cedar Bungalows
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- August 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 November 2020.
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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 £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.