CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Clarendon Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People generally felt safe and staff understood safeguarding and risks such as falls and choking. Inspectors noted that staffing levels did not always match support needs, and some people felt less safe when another resident entered their room at night.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and people received support with food, drink, health needs and equipment. People were supported to make choices and staff followed the principles of least restrictive care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors observed respectful support, although some people felt their privacy was not always respected by other residents.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's preferences, communication needs and goals. People were supported to maintain relationships and take part in activities, and relatives said they could raise concerns.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team had improvement plans and quality checks that identified and followed up actions. Relatives did report a recent lack of communication, including important information not being passed on about care.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, effective care, but noted staffing pressures, night-time privacy concerns and gaps in family communication.
This was the home's first inspection since registering. It was unannounced and took place on 01 February 2022. One inspector spoke with people living there, relatives and staff, and reviewed care, medicines, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people generally felt safe, received their medicines properly, had suitable food and support, and were treated with kindness and respect.
There were some issues to keep watching. Staffing levels did not always match people's needs, some people said another resident entered their rooms at night, and relatives reported that important care information had not always been passed on.
The home had been registered in January 2021, so there was no earlier inspection rating to compare with. Conditions imposed at registration were reviewed during this inspection, and the report says the home had systems and plans to improve.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives generally described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors also observed people being treated respectfully.
“People and their relatives told us the staff were kind and they had a good relationship with them.” from the report
Medicines and risk support
Medicines records were checked and staff were trained and assessed as competent to administer medicines. Risk assessments covered needs such as falls and choking.
“The management team checked that medicine administration records were documented clearly and accurately.” from the report
Food and personal choice
People could choose food and drink, and staff understood modified diets and choking risks. People helped shape the meal planner.
“People had genuine choice and access to food and drink throughout the day.” from the report
Improvement systems
The provider had quality checks and an improvement plan. Inspectors found evidence that identified improvements were acted on and shared with staff.
“Quality assurance systems were in place and identified areas of improvement.” from the report
Staffing and call-bell waits
needs fixingStaffing levels did not always reflect people's support needs. Records showed that people sometimes waited to be seen after using their call bells, particularly in the morning.
“Staff and records suggested at times staffing levels did not meet the level of support needs and dependency tools did not always look at this.” from the report
Night-time privacy and safety
needs fixingThree people said another resident had entered their rooms at night. The manager knew about this and was looking for solutions.
“People and relatives told us the home provided care that felt safe, however, there were times where they felt they could be safer.” from the report
Communication with relatives
needs fixingSome relatives said that important information about their relative's care had not been passed on in recent months. This is important to clarify with the home.
“Relatives felt the service was good in parts, however in most recent months there had been a lack of communication and some vital information had not been passed on to them about their relative's care.” from the report
- 01What staffing levels are in place now, and how quickly are call bells answered in the morning?
- 02What specific steps have been taken to stop residents entering other people's rooms at night?
- 03How will you keep relatives informed about important changes in their family member's care?
- 04Which staff training or refresher courses were still outstanding at the inspection, and have they now been completed?
- 05What changes were made after the registration conditions were reviewed?
This was the first unannounced inspection and covered all five CQC key questions, as well as infection prevention and control and the conditions imposed at registration. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 February 2022 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 Clarendon Lodge
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- February 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 January 2021.
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 Hertfordshire
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 £1,300 a week. 82 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%.”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.