CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Coney Green Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected by risk assessments, safeguarding procedures, safe recruitment and sufficient staffing. Medicines were managed safely, but inspectors saw two infection-control mistakes that were addressed immediately.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff understood people's individual needs and received training and supervision. People were supported with food, healthcare appointments and decisions under the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- People appeared comfortable and relaxed with staff, who supported dignity, independence and choice. Inspectors did see one staff member using a personal mobile phone in a person's bedroom, which was dealt with immediately.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences, communication needs and changing health needs. People were supported with family relationships, education, volunteering, hobbies and community activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had regular meetings, audits and systems for monitoring safety and quality. Staff and relatives said they could raise concerns and felt listened to.
What inspectors found, August 2021
Coney Green Residential Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with two infection-control issues and one privacy concern dealt with immediately.
This was an unannounced inspection on 27 July 2021. Inspectors spoke with people, staff, relatives and health professionals. They observed care and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment, training and management records.
The home supported eight people at the time, with capacity for nine. Inspectors found people were safe, treated well and supported to make choices. Staff understood people's health needs, medicines were managed safely, and care plans were updated when needs changed.
Inspectors saw two staff members not following infection-control best practice and one staff member using a personal mobile phone in a person's bedroom. The registered manager dealt with all three issues immediately. All five areas were rated Good, the same as at the previous inspection.
People felt safe
People appeared comfortable around staff, and staff understood the risks affecting the people they supported.
“People were clearly comfortable, relaxed and happy around care staff and staff understood how to keep people safe.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Inspectors found clear medicine records, safe storage and administration, and checks of staff competence.
“People received their prescribed medications safely and in accordance with their specific guidance.” from the report
Personalised care
Staff knew people's preferences and supported them to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“Care plans identified people's choices and preferences, histories, hobbies and interests, allowing staff to have a person-centred approach when supporting people.” from the report
Family and community links
People were supported to keep in touch with relatives and to take part in activities, education, volunteering and trips.
“People were supported to pursue hobbies and interests that were important to them.” from the report
Infection-control practice
needs fixingInspectors saw two staff members with long, painted nails and found soiled laundry on a bedroom floor. Both issues were corrected immediately, but they show that daily checks were needed.
“We saw two incidents of staff not following best practice in relation to infection prevention and control practices.” from the report
Privacy during a phone call
needs fixingA staff member used a personal mobile phone in a person's bedroom while the person was present. The manager addressed this when it was reported.
“one incident where a staff member was using their personal mobile phone in a person's bedroom, when the person was present.” from the report
Further improvements to the home
minorSome staff thought more refurbishment was needed. The manager had identified areas for decoration and new fixtures and described improvements already completed or planned.
“Some staff told us they would like the home to have further refurbishment to make the environment nicer for people using the service.” from the report
More face-to-face training
minorSome staff said they would benefit from more face-to-face training, including dementia and moving and handling training.
“However, some staff did say they felt they would benefit from more face to face training such as dementia training and moving and handling.” from the report
- 01What checks are now in place to make sure staff follow infection-control rules, including nail and laundry procedures?
- 02What is the home's policy on staff using personal mobile phones in people's rooms?
- 03Which refurbishment work has been completed since the inspection, and what work is still planned?
- 04How much face-to-face training do staff receive, particularly in moving and handling and supporting people with dementia?
- 05How will you support my relative to maintain family relationships, hobbies and community activities?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, with specific checks on infection prevention and control; the previous Good ratings were reviewed and remained unchanged. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 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.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Coney Green Residential Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about its COVID-19 infection prevention measures.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 19 March 2021. It focused on infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, rather than the full quality of care.
Inspectors found good arrangements for visits, testing, PPE, hand washing, cleaning and social distancing. A spare bedroom had been changed into a lounge so people could be separated if there was an outbreak.
The home was inspected but not rated overall. The Safe question was also inspected but not rated, so this report does not provide a full current judgement on the home.
Visiting arrangements
People had individual visiting plans, and feedback from people and their loved ones was used to improve visits.
“People had individual visiting plans. Feedback was gained from people and their loved ones to support continued improvement of their experience during visits.” from the report
Outbreak planning
A vacant bedroom had been turned into another lounge, allowing people to be separated if there were COVID-19 cases.
“A vacant bedroom had been changed into a further lounge area.” from the report
Support with PPE
Staff used role play to help reassure people who found it upsetting to see staff wearing PPE.
“Staff had conducted role play with people to reassure them about the use of PPE.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that PPE, testing, hygiene, admissions and outbreak prevention arrangements were in place.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are individual visiting plans arranged and updated now?
- 02How would you separate people if there was a COVID-19 case or another infection outbreak?
- 03How often are people and staff tested, and what happens after a positive result?
- 04How do you support people who find staff PPE distressing?
- 05What are the home's latest ratings for caring, effective, responsive and well-led care?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; the service was inspected but not rated and the other questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 April 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 Coney Green Residential Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Coney Green Residential Home →
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Coney Green Residential Home →
- May 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 January 2011.
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 Birmingham
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 £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“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.