CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Cromwell Avenue
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. There were enough suitable staff, recruitment checks had been completed, medicines were managed safely and the home was clean.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff received training, supervision and support, including training for people's individual health and behavioural needs. People were supported with food, healthcare, consent and decisions made under the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, respect and compassion. People were supported to make choices, communicate in ways they understood and remain as independent as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and included people's strengths, interests, preferences and future goals. People took part in activities, used the local community and had their views recorded and considered.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open culture and supportive management. Regular checks and audits were used to monitor medicines, care plans, health and safety, and the condition of the home.
What inspectors found, February 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind, personalised care and effective management.
The home supports people with learning disabilities and/or autistic spectrum conditions. Five people lived there at the time of the inspection. The inspection was unannounced and took place on 22 January 2019.
Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, staff and the manager. They reviewed care records, staff records, training information, daily logs, safety records and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, detailed care plans, kind support and good systems for checking quality.
The previous inspection also rated the home Good. This inspection found that the evidence still supported that rating, with no serious risks or concerns identified.
Good knowledge of people
Staff knew people's care needs, personal histories, routines, preferences and possible causes of anxiety. They used this knowledge to provide individual support.
“The support staff demonstrated an excellent knowledge of people's care needs, significant people and events in their lives, and their daily routines and preferences.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed staff treating people politely and kindly. People were supported with dignity, privacy, choice and independence.
“The service ensured people were treated with kindness, respect and compassion.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's needs, strengths and hopes for the future. People were involved in choices about care, food and activities.
“Care plans were very detailed; person centred and provided good information for staff to follow.” from the report
Good health support
Staff took an active approach to supporting people's complex health needs and worked with health professionals when specialist input was needed.
“The registered manager took a very proactive approach to helping people maintain good health.” from the report
Positive management
Staff described management as supportive and said they could raise concerns and make suggestions. The home used regular quality checks and audits.
“The service was well led. There was a clear set of values in place which all the staff put into practice.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are each person's detailed care plans and risk assessments reviewed and updated?
- 02How will you make sure medicines remain safely managed, including when records show a discrepancy?
- 03What specific training and support will staff receive for my relative's health needs, autism or behaviour that may challenge?
- 04How will my relative be involved in decisions about food, activities, healthcare and their daily care?
- 05How can relatives contribute to care reviews, meetings and the home's surveys?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, including both the accommodation and care provided, and all five CQC questions were assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 February 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.
What inspectors found, September 2016
Cromwell Avenue was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and well-organised support, with some new audit processes still being embedded.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 20 July 2016. One inspector spoke with people using the home, staff, the training coordinator and the registered manager. They also observed care and reviewed care records, medicines, staff checks, training, complaints and quality monitoring.
The inspectors found good arrangements to protect people from harm. There were personalised risk assessments, enough staff, thorough recruitment checks and safe medicines management. Staff were trained, supervised and understood how to support people who could not make some decisions for themselves.
People were described as receiving kind and respectful care. Their care plans reflected their choices and communication needs. They were supported with food, healthcare, hobbies, sports and other activities. The home had a complaints process and regular quality checks. All five areas inspected were rated Good.
Personalised risk support
Risk assessments covered people's individual risks and gave staff clear guidance on how to reduce harm. They were reviewed regularly.
“People had personalised risk assessments in place to minimise potential risks to their health and wellbeing.” from the report
Enough trained staff
The inspectors found planned staffing levels were sufficient, with extra staff available when people needed support outside the home. Recruitment checks were thorough.
“The provider had robust recruitment processes in place, and there was enough skilled and experienced staff to support people safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff understood people's individual needs and communicated well with people who had limited verbal communication. People were supported with privacy, dignity and choice.
“We observed positive, friendly and respectful interactions between people who used the service and staff.” from the report
Active and individual lives
People were supported to follow their interests and take part in activities including sports, holidays, shopping and theatre trips.
“People were encouraged and supported to pursue their hobbies and interests. Some of them took part in competitive sports.” from the report
Feedback used to improve
People and relatives could give feedback through meetings and questionnaires. The provider acted on comments and used regular audits to make improvements.
“Quality monitoring audits had been completed regularly and these had been used effectively to drive continuous improvements.” from the report
New audit system still being learned
minorSome audit forms had recently changed, and the manager needed more time to become familiar with them. The manager planned to seek further support.
“They had recently updated some of their audit forms and the manager needed more time to get used to the new system.” from the report
Some legal authorisation responses outstanding
needs fixingThe home had referred people for assessment where their care might restrict their liberty. At the inspection, one authorisation was in place but responses for other referrals were still awaited.
“One person had a valid authorisation in place, but the manager was still waiting for responses for the other referrals they had sent.” from the report
- 01How are people's current risk assessments reviewed, especially for community activities, eating and drinking, and times when someone becomes upset?
- 02How are medicines checked now, and what action is taken if a medicine record is incomplete or incorrect?
- 03Were the outstanding local authority responses to the liberty restriction referrals received, and are all current authorisations in place?
- 04How are the newer audit forms being used now, and what improvements have resulted from them?
- 05How are people currently involved in reviewing their care plans and choosing activities?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 September 2016 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 Cromwell Avenue
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 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 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.