CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at CTTM Elmfield Cottage
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks were assessed, staff recruitment checks were completed and medicines were administered as prescribed.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training, supervision and knowledge of people's needs. People chose their food, had their health needs supported and were involved in decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People said staff were kind and caring. Inspectors saw positive interactions and found that privacy, dignity, individuality and independence were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and reviewed with people. Staff supported activities, communication needs, relationships and people's preferred routines.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People and staff said managers were approachable and available. Quality checks were effective, although there was no registered manager in post and temporary arrangements were being used.
What inspectors found, December 2019
CTTM Elmfield Cottage was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no major shortfalls reported.
This was an unannounced inspection on 16 July 2019. One inspector spoke with two people, the manager and staff. They observed care, reviewed three care records, checked medicines records and looked at complaints, feedback and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe, were treated kindly and received support from staff who knew them well.
The home supported five younger people with learning disabilities, mental health conditions and sensory impairments. Inspectors found that people were encouraged to make choices, build independence, take part in activities and maintain important relationships.
The previous rating was also Good, published in February 2017. There was no registered manager in post at the time, but an interim management arrangement was in place. The manager was also planning to develop end of life care plans.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make everyday decisions, learn skills and live as independently as possible. Staff used the least restrictive approaches and involved people in planning their care.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's preferences and needs. Staff knew people's routines and responded when someone became anxious.
“People confirmed they received personalised care from staff who knew them well.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People described staff positively and inspectors saw relaxed, respectful interactions. Privacy and dignity were maintained.
“Interactions between people and staff were positive and demonstrated people were treated well and showed they felt relaxed in the company of staff.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
People received medicines as prescribed. Staff were trained, records were checked and medicines were ordered, stored, given and disposed of safely.
“People told us they received their medicines as prescribed. Medicine administration records (MAR) we reviewed confirmed this.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People took part in activities they enjoyed and were supported to maintain important relationships. Families and friends could visit at any time.
“People chose to take part in a range of social activities and were encouraged to maintain interests which they enjoyed to lead meaningful lives.” from the report
End of life planning
minorNo one living at the home was nearing the end of their life during the inspection. The manager said plans were still being developed to record people's wishes.
“The manager told us they were planning to develop plans in this area to ensure peoples wishes were recorded.” from the report
- 01Is a registered manager now in post, and if not, who has day-to-day responsibility for the home?
- 02How are people's end of life wishes recorded and reviewed?
- 03How will you support my relative to build independence and learn new skills?
- 04How are risks, medicines and changes in people's health monitored and communicated to staff?
- 05How are people's views and complaints collected and acted on?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the previous Good rating from 2017 remained unchanged. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 December 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, February 2017
CTTM Elmfield Cottage was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support, with a small training shortfall being addressed.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 24 January 2017. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, managers and support staff. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicines, incidents and quality records.
The home supported up to five people with learning disabilities. Three people were living there at the time. Inspectors found that people were safe, medicines were managed properly and staffing matched people's assessed needs.
People were supported to make choices, stay as independent as possible and access health care. Staff knew people's preferences and provided kind, individual support. The home was rated Good in all five areas, and the overall Good rating remained unchanged from the previous inspection.
Safe support
Risks were reviewed and staff understood how to protect people from abuse and harm. Staffing was based on assessed needs and could be increased when necessary.
“People's risks were managed well to ensure their safety.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff received medicines training and had their competence checked. Daily checks were used to identify errors or missing records promptly.
“We saw that medicines were administered and managed safely.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in planning their support and were encouraged to make choices about daily life, activities and personal care.
“People were encouraged to maintain their independence. At lunchtime we saw staff help people prepare their lunch in the kitchen.” from the report
Personalised care
Staff understood people's routines, preferences and interests. Weekly plans were presented in a pictorial format and could change when people changed their minds.
“People received care and support which was personal to them and took account of their preferences.” from the report
Training completion
minorAn audit found that two staff members had not completed all their training. The report says training had been scheduled for them.
“In the Dignity of Care audit it had been identified two staff had not completed all their training.” from the report
- 01Have all staff now completed the training identified in the Dignity of Care audit?
- 02How would staffing levels change if my relative's care needs increased or they needed two staff for an activity?
- 03How are medicines checks recorded, and how would you tell us about any medicine error?
- 04How would my relative be supported to make choices if they found it difficult to communicate or lacked capacity for a particular decision?
- 05How would you adapt activities and daily plans if my relative changed their mind or their interests changed?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC questions and reviewing care, medicines, incidents, staffing and quality records. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 February 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 CTTM Elmfield Cottage
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 August 2012.
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 Worcestershire
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 £1,260 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.