CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Cordwainers
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines management, appropriate risk assessments and good cleanliness and food safety.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the training, supervision and support needed for people's individual and complex needs. People had access to healthcare, suitable food and drink, and support that respected their choices and legal rights.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, patient and respectful. Inspectors saw warm relationships, support for people's independence and care that protected privacy and dignity.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised, and were updated when people's needs changed. People were supported to follow their interests, maintain relationships and make complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home was well managed, with staff reporting good support and communication. Quality checks identified shortfalls and action plans were used to improve the service.
What inspectors found, March 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a new manager still completing registration.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 10 and 11 January 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staffing records, training files, audits and other documents.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable training, kind relationships and care that reflected people's needs and choices.
The home had improved since the 2015 inspection, when staffing levels were not sufficient and Safe required improvement. Inspectors found that the increased staffing had been maintained. The previous registered manager had left, but the new manager was supported and was applying to become registered.
Enough staff
Staffing levels matched people's assessed needs, including when someone needed extra support or urgent hospital care.
“The home manager ensured there were always sufficient numbers of suitable staff deployed to keep people safe and meet their assessed needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People had familiar staff who knew them well. Inspectors saw staff protect people's dignity, privacy and emotional wellbeing.
“People experienced positive caring relationships with staff who consistently treated them with kindness and compassion in their day-to-day care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's preferences, communication needs and interests. People were supported to be independent and take part in activities they enjoyed.
“People's care plans were person centred and contained detailed support that identified how their assessed needs were to be met.” from the report
Good improvement systems
The management team used audits and action plans to monitor care and act on problems.
“Action plans were developed following each audit and monitored to drive the continuous development and improvement of the service.” from the report
Manager registration was not complete
minorThere was no registered manager when inspectors visited. The new manager had started the registration process and was being supported by experienced managers.
“The service did not have a manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).” from the report
Future end of life wishes
minorNo one living at the home needed end of life care during the inspection. People had not wanted to discuss their wishes, and the new manager planned to revisit this with people and families where appropriate.
“People's care plans contained a section regarding their end of life wishes but people did not wish to discuss these at the time of planning or in later reviews, which had been recorded.” from the report
- 01Has the new home manager now completed registration with the CQC, and who is responsible for the home if they are absent?
- 02How do you check that staffing levels remain sufficient when a person's needs change or someone needs to go to hospital?
- 03How are medicines checked and staff competency kept up to date?
- 04How will you involve my relative and our family in recording future end of life wishes if they are ready to discuss them?
- 05How do you use complaints, accidents and audit findings to make changes?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, and it reviewed improvements made since earlier inspections. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 March 2018 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, November 2017
Rated Good overall; staffing had improved and the previous legal breach was fixed, but Safe was still rated Requires Improvement.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 25 July 2017. It checked whether the home had fixed a staffing problem found at the comprehensive inspection in November 2015.
Inspectors found that staffing numbers had increased to meet people's assessed needs. They saw staff spending time with people, supporting activities and providing care. The home had also increased its permanent staff and was not using agency staff.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe was rated Requires Improvement, although the report says the provider had met the legal requirement about staffing. The Safe rating was to be reviewed at the next comprehensive inspection.
More staff available
The home increased its staffing levels in response to people's assessed needs. Inspectors found the legal requirement about staffing had been met.
“People's dependency needs had been assessed and sufficient staff were now employed to meet people's needs.” from the report
More activities
People were supported with activities in the community and at home. Inspectors saw evidence that activities were in line with care plans.
“We saw evidence of people participating in a variety of activities both out in the community and in the home.” from the report
Consistent care
The number of permanent staff had increased and staff retention had been good. The report says this improved consistency of care.
“There were no agency staff used by the service and the increase in employed staff had resulted in an improved consistency of care for people.” from the report
Recent staff vacancy
needs fixingA recent vacancy had reduced staffing hours. The manager was reviewing how staff would be deployed while keeping people's assessed needs in mind.
“Due to one recent vacancy in the home staffing hours had been reduced.” from the report
- 01How are you covering the recent staff vacancy, and what staffing levels are in place now?
- 02How do you check that staffing continues to match each person's assessed needs?
- 03What activities are currently available in the home and in the community?
- 04When will the Safe rating be reviewed through a comprehensive inspection?
This was a focused inspection of staffing and Safe only; it checked improvements required after the comprehensive inspection in November 2015, and did not reassess all five questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 November 2017 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 Cordwainers
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvement
- December 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 October 2014.
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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.