CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Downers Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and individual risks were assessed. However, medicines stock records did not always match medicines records, and some staff did not follow the medicines policy.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received support with food, drink, health needs and access to health services. Staff had relevant training, although the Care Certificate had not yet been embedded for new staff.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, patient and respectful. People were supported with privacy, independence, relationships and choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported to take part in activities suited to their needs, including community visits and specially arranged activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team carried out checks and acted quickly when concerns were found. Staff said communication was good and that they felt supported to raise concerns.
What inspectors found, July 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but medicines records and recruitment checks were not always safe.
This was an announced inspection on 19 April 2018. One inspector observed care, spoke with staff and relatives, and reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files, audits and other records. The home supports three men in two bungalows, and some people could not give verbal feedback.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were happy, treated with kindness and supported to make choices, stay healthy and take part in activities that mattered to them.
There were shortfalls in medicines management and recruitment records. Medicines had been given as prescribed, but stock records did not always match and some staff did not follow the medicines policy. Employment gaps had not always been checked. The registered manager took immediate action on both issues and improved the checking systems.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, patience and dignity. The atmosphere was calm, relaxed and homely.
“Staff were cheerful, kind and patient in their approach and had a good rapport with people.” from the report
Personalised activities
Activities were based on each person's interests and needs. Staff used preparation and social stories to help people try new experiences.
“People's activities were totally centred around each person.” from the report
Good health support
Staff noticed changes in people's health and contacted health professionals when needed. Dietary needs were assessed and supported.
“People were supported to maintain good health.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make everyday choices and live as independently as possible. Their refusals and decisions were recorded.
“People were encouraged to make their own choices about everyday matters.” from the report
Medicines checks
seriousStock balances did not always match the medicines records. Some handwritten entries were not signed or checked as required, although the manager acted immediately and introduced more audits.
“Stock balances did not always tally with medicines records.” from the report
Care Certificate not yet embedded
needs fixingThe provider had not yet put the Care Certificate in place for new staff. The provider said it planned to do this soon.
“The provider had not yet embedded the Care Certificate to support staff with understanding their roles.” from the report
- 01What did the twice-weekly medicines audits find after the inspection, and are stock balances now checked against the records?
- 02Have all staff had their competency to administer medicines safely rechecked?
- 03How are employment history gaps and other recruitment checks now recorded before staff start work?
- 04Has the Care Certificate now been embedded for new staff?
- 05How will you make sure activities and social stories continue to reflect each person's choices and needs?
This was an announced inspection covering the home, the care provided and all five CQC questions; the shorter report format was used because the overall Good rating had not changed. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 July 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.
Every inspection of Downers Court
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 April 2015.
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
91 live-in carers within about an hour of Medway
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 £1,250 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
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.