CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Coppermill Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and reviewed, medicines were given safely, and there were enough staff to meet people's needs. Safeguarding procedures, safety checks and infection control were also in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's needs, preferences and wishes, and people were supported with healthcare, activities, complaints and end of life care. Inspectors noted some difficulties communicating in English with two staff members.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive culture, supportive management and effective checks on quality. There was no registered manager in post at the time, but a new manager had applied to register.
What inspectors found, March 2023
Coppermill Care Centre is rated Good; inspectors found safe and responsive care, but noted some communication difficulties.
This was an unannounced focused inspection after information about an increase in safeguarding concerns. Inspectors checked Safe, Responsive and Well-led. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional, and reviewed care records, medicines, complaints, incidents, audits and recruitment records.
Inspectors found people were protected from avoidable harm. Medicines, staffing, fire safety and infection control were managed well. Care plans were detailed and people had access to healthcare, activities and support that reflected their choices.
People and relatives were generally happy with the care. The home had a positive culture, good systems for checking quality and a manager who was described as approachable. The overall rating remained Good. Effective and Caring were not checked during this inspection, so the previous ratings for those areas were carried forward.
Protection from harm
Risks were identified, assessed and reviewed when people's needs changed. The home investigated incidents and worked with the local authority on safeguarding concerns.
“People were protected from the risk of avoidable harm.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were ordered, stored and disposed of safely. Staff competency was checked and regular medicine audits were carried out.
“Medicines were managed well and people received these safely and as prescribed.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's life histories, preferences, communication signs and wishes about daily life and end of life care.
“Care plans were detailed and developed from the initial assessments.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to choose activities they enjoyed, including bingo, outings, walks and visits. Two activity coordinators helped involve people in planning.
“People were supported to undertake activities they liked, and these were recorded in their care plans.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider used audits, walkarounds, surveys and checks of records and equipment to monitor and improve the home.
“The provider had effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service and how it was managed.” from the report
Communication with some staff
needs fixingInspectors observed that two staff members found it difficult to communicate in English, which created a barrier for some people. The manager said this would be addressed.
“However, we observed two members of staff found it difficult to communicate in English and this seemed to cause a communication barrier with people.” from the report
Preferred forms of address
minorSome staff used terms of endearment that might not have been the person's preferred way of being addressed. The manager said this was being addressed.
“Some of the staff addressed all the people by terms of endearment, which may not be the person's choice or preferred way of address.” from the report
Registered manager status
minorThere was no registered manager in post during the inspection. A new manager had been in post for two months and had submitted an application to register.
“At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01What action have you taken to make sure all staff can communicate clearly with residents?
- 02How do you make sure each resident is addressed in the way they prefer?
- 03What is the current position on the new manager's application to register?
- 04What safeguarding concerns led to this focused inspection, and what changes were made afterwards?
- 05How will you keep reviewing risks involving incidents or disagreements between residents?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led only; Effective and Caring were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 March 2023 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 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some medicine, training and maintenance issues to address.
This was an unannounced inspection on 29 June 2022. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, visitors, staff and healthcare professionals. They toured the building and checked medicines, infection control, care records, staff records, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from avoidable harm, received medicines as prescribed, had their health and nutrition needs met, and received personalised care.
The report says the home had improved since its previous inspection, when it was rated Requires Improvement and breached regulations. It was no longer in breach of those regulations. However, there was no registered manager in post, some medicine guidance was incomplete, some training refreshers were overdue and handrails had peeling paint.
Safer care systems
Risks to people's safety and wellbeing were assessed, managed and reviewed when needs changed. The home also had regular checks of fire safety, equipment and the environment.
“Risks to people's safety and wellbeing had been assessed and mitigated. Risk assessments were detailed and were reviewed and updated when people's needs changed.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about the staff. Inspectors saw calm, unrushed care that respected privacy, dignity and independence.
“Throughout the day, we saw staff attending to people in an unrushed manner.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's life histories, preferences, routines, health needs and end-of-life wishes. They were reviewed as people's needs changed.
“Care plans were kept electronically and were detailed. They contained people's life history which contained details about their childhood, family members, hobbies and interests.” from the report
Good activities and communication
People were offered a range of activities and outings, with alternatives for people who did not want group activities or who were cared for in bed. Communication needs were recorded and supported in different ways.
“Activities organised included, pamper morning, bingo, armchair exercises, afternoon walk, parachute game and poetry morning.” from the report
Improved oversight
The provider had introduced regular checks and monthly reviews of incidents, complaints, safeguarding, medicines, care plans and nutrition. These were used to identify trends and plan improvements.
“The provider had implemented an effective system to learn from safeguarding concerns, incidents, accidents and complaints.” from the report
Medicine guidance was incomplete
needs fixingSome protocols did not explain the signs and symptoms to check before giving as-required medicines. Guidance for some variable doses was not recorded in care plans or protocols.
“However, protocols did not always include this information.” from the report
Peeling paint on handrails
needs fixingHandrails throughout the home had peeling paint. Inspectors said this could prevent thorough cleaning and create an infection risk. The provider said the rails would be treated.
“However, we found that handrails throughout the home had peeling paint, which could prevent thorough cleaning and pose a risk of infection.” from the report
Training refreshers overdue
needs fixingSome staff had not completed their training refreshers when inspectors visited. The provider said staff had been reminded to complete them by 8 July.
“We identified that some training refreshers had not been completed for some of the staff.” from the report
No registered manager
minorThe registered manager had left before the inspection. Deputy managers and the director were managing the home while the provider recruited for the post.
“At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01What has been done to complete the missing guidance for as-required and variable-dose medicines?
- 02Have all overdue staff training refreshers now been completed, and how is this checked?
- 03Have the peeling handrails been stripped, treated and made safe to clean?
- 04Who is currently responsible for managing the home, and when do you expect a registered manager to be in post?
- 05How will you make sure the improvements found at this inspection continue?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including infection control, medicines, care records, staffing and quality systems; the provider was not asked to complete a Provider Information Return. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 July 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 Coppermill Care Centre
6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2022Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2020Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2020Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 December 2010.
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 Hillingdon
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 £1,320 a week. 81 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult times.”
“She has an unusual combination of kindness and firmness, is quite unflappable, physically strong, extremely savvy”
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.