CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Coleshill Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were regularly assessed and managed, medicines were administered safely and there were enough suitably recruited staff. Infection prevention arrangements were also found to be effective.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not rated in this inspection report.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not rated in this inspection report, although inspectors described care as kind, compassionate and personalised.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not rated in this inspection report, although inspectors found that support and activities were personalised and directed by the people receiving care.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found that the home was well managed. People, relatives and staff were involved, and audits and meetings were used to monitor and improve the service.
What inspectors found, June 2022
Coleshill Road was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements since an earlier risk-management breach.
The home provides personal care for up to four people with a learning disability. Two people were living there when inspectors visited.
One inspector visited on 30 May 2022 and reviewed records through 31 May. They spoke with a person, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines, recruitment records and management systems. Infection prevention and control was also checked.
Inspectors found that people were safe, supported to make choices and treated with kindness. Risks were managed, medicines records were complete, staffing was sufficient and the home was well managed. The overall rating was Good, as were the Safe and Well-led ratings.
At the previous inspection, the home had breached Regulation 12 because people's individual risks were not always managed safely. Inspectors found that this had improved and the regulation was now being met.
Promoting independence
Staff focused on people's strengths and supported them to set their own goals, make choices and follow their interests.
“The model of care supported people to live as independently as possible with the right support.” from the report
Kind and personal care
Inspectors found that care was compassionate and tailored to people's needs. Staff knew the people they supported well.
“People received care, which was kind, compassionate and personalised to their needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were securely stored, records were complete and staff had training and regular checks of their competence.
“Medicine administration records were fully completed and up to date.” from the report
Involvement and communication
People were involved in their care and in how the home was run. Relatives said communication was good and information was shared promptly.
“People were fully included in their care and the way the home was run.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you make sure each person's risk assessments stay up to date and continue to reflect their individual coping strategies?
- 02How often are medicines audits and staff competency checks completed, and what happens if a problem is found?
- 03How do you make sure there are enough familiar staff available when someone is off sick or absent?
- 04How are people and their relatives involved when care plans change or something goes wrong?
- 05How do you record and act on feedback from people, relatives and staff?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not rated in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 June 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.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, personalised care but unsafe gaps in following risk plans and inconsistent leadership.
This was the home's first inspection. It was unannounced and took place on 13 June 2019. Inspectors spoke with relatives, staff and managers, and checked care records, medicines, training, incidents, recruitment and quality checks.
The home provided care for up to four people with learning disabilities or autism. Three people lived there during the visit. Inspectors found enough staff and caring, person-centred support. People were helped to make choices, build independence, keep relationships and access activities.
The home was not always safe. Staff did not follow one person's risk plan, leaving the person without the required support. Cleaning materials were unlocked, and a medicines-room window needed a restrictor. Some care records needed updating.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Effective, caring and responsive care were rated Good. Safe and well-led were rated Requires Improvement. The provider was in breach of Regulation 12 and had to send CQC an action plan.
Kind and respectful care
Staff had good relationships with people and supported their dignity, choices and family connections.
“People were supported by staff respectfully and were encouraged with day to day tasks such as making drinks and doing laundry.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people's preferences and matched support to their interests, needs and goals.
“People received care which met their needs and reflected their preferences.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make daily decisions, learn life skills and take part in activities they enjoyed.
“The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion.” from the report
Medicines arrangements
Inspectors found that medicines were stored and given using safe procedures, and staff had their competence checked.
“Medicines systems were organised, and people received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Risk plan not followed
seriousOne person assessed as needing continuous support from two staff was left without that support. This was the reason for the breach of Regulation 12.
“However, staff did not always follow this risk guidance to keep people safe.” from the report
Unsettled management
needs fixingThere had been several management changes, which staff said affected people and made the service less consistent. There was no registered manager present during the visit.
“There has been too many managers. It affects the service users when they have to try to adapt to seeing someone new.” from the report
Records needed updating
needs fixingSome care plans were not fully up to date. The new manager had started work to improve them.
“However, some care plans required updating further. This had been identified by the manager who was in the process of doing this.” from the report
Staff vacancies
needs fixingThere were vacancies, with some shifts covered by existing staff, bank staff and temporary agency staff.
“There were some staff vacancies and challenges were in recruiting care staff.” from the report
Notification errors
needs fixingSome notifications had been sent against another service, so CQC did not have a clear view of events at this home.
“Unfortunately, due to an administrative error, some notifications had been submitted against another of the provider's services which meant we had been unable to have a clear oversight of events at Coleshill Road.” from the report
- 01What has been done to make sure staff always follow each person's risk plan, especially when two staff are required?
- 02How is the system for alerting staff to additional support needs working now?
- 03Has a new registered manager been appointed, and how will you provide leadership stability?
- 04How many staff vacancies are there now, and how often are temporary agency staff used?
- 05Have all care plans and CQC notifications been checked and corrected since the inspection?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care, accommodation, records, staffing and management arrangements examined during the visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 July 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.
Every inspection of Coleshill Road
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2022Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2019Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 October 2018.
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 Solihull
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 £1,250 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.