CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at DRS Annexe Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding, risk assessments gave clear guidance, medicines records were accurate and there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and reviewed with people and those important to them. Staff had relevant training, people had food choices and health care needs were supported.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was a focused inspection and Caring was not assessed or newly rated.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was a focused inspection and Responsive was not assessed or newly rated.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found visible and approachable management, good involvement of families and staff, and effective audits to monitor and improve the service.
What inspectors found, November 2022
DRS Annexe Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care, with face-mask use corrected during the visit.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 14 September 2022. One inspector and an Expert by Experience spoke with nine people, three relatives, staff and managers. They reviewed care plans, risk assessments, health records, staff files and quality audits.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, suitable recruitment checks, clean premises and care plans that reflected people's needs. People were supported to make choices, stay independent and access health care.
The inspection followed concerns about management, staffing levels, recruitment and medicines. Inspectors found the overall rating remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection published in 2018. Caring and Responsive were not assessed during this focused inspection.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make decisions, take part in activities and manage some parts of their own care, including medicines and household tasks.
“The model of care and setting maximised people's choice, control and independence.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff followed people's agreed medicine protocols. The records reviewed were accurate, and staff had medicine training and competency checks.
“We reviewed four people's medicine records and found them to be up to date and accurate.” from the report
Enough trained staff
Inspectors found staffing levels met people's needs, including one-to-one support. Recruitment checks and staff training records were in place.
“The service had enough staff, including for one-to-one support for people to take part in activities and visits how and when they wanted.” from the report
Good oversight
The manager understood people's needs and used audits covering areas such as medicines, health and safety and care plans.
“The provider had an effective system for auditing and monitoring the service.” from the report
Face masks were not being worn initially
minorInspectors saw staff without face masks, although current government guidance said care staff should wear them. The manager corrected this immediately during the visit.
“During our visit we observed staff were not wearing face masks” from the report
- 01How do you now check that staff follow current infection prevention guidance, including face-mask requirements?
- 02How do you make sure there are enough staff for one-to-one support and community visits?
- 03What progress has been made with the planned sensory area?
- 04How will you support the request for people to visit more places of interest?
- 05How often are medicines, care plans and other quality areas audited, and what happens when an audit finds a problem?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not assessed, and the previous overall rating from 2018 remained in place. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 November 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.
What inspectors found, November 2018
DRS Annexe Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and well-managed support, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection on 9 October 2018. Two inspectors spoke with five people, seven staff and relatives, and reviewed care plans, staff files, medicines records, audits and other documents.
The home supported 12 men with mental health needs and learning disabilities. Inspectors found people felt safe and were treated with kindness and respect. Staff understood people's needs, supported choice and helped people access healthcare, activities and the community.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The provider had addressed five breaches found at the August 2017 inspection, including problems with recruitment, medicines, consent, person-centred care and governance.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt comfortable and secure with staff. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse.
“People told us they were well treated by the staff and felt safe with them.” from the report
Medicines were checked
Inspectors found accurate records covering medicines being received, stored, given and disposed of. Regular audits were used to identify possible errors.
“Records showed that medicines were audited regularly so that any potential errors could be picked up and addressed quickly.” from the report
Respectful communication
Staff understood people's likes, dislikes and communication needs. They used pictures, body language and facial expressions to help involve people in decisions.
“Staff gave us examples of how they communicated with people who did not always use verbal communication, for example through use of pictures or by understanding people's body language and facial expressions.” from the report
Individual care and activities
Care plans included personal goals and preferences. People were supported with regular activities and access to the community.
“These revised care plans were designed to meet people's identified needs and to provide achievable goals for people and so, improve their skills and general well-being.” from the report
Improved quality checks
The provider had introduced audits covering areas such as fire safety, health and safety, food and hygiene. These were intended to identify problems promptly.
“These were designed to identify any potential problems so action could be taken to address any concern in a timely manner.” from the report
Future care wishes were not complete for everyone
minorSome people's care plans included information about support they might need near the end of life, but some sections were incomplete because people were not ready to discuss this.
“Some people did not feel ready to discuss this.” from the report
- 01How do you check that the improved medicines records and regular medicines audits are still accurate?
- 02How are each person's risks, preferences and personal goals reviewed and updated?
- 03How do you support people who communicate without speech to make choices about their care?
- 04How do you decide when extra staff are needed if people's needs increase or they have hospital or GP appointments?
- 05How will you revisit future or end-of-life care wishes with people who are not currently ready to discuss them?
This unannounced inspection looked at the overall service and rated all five areas; it found that the breaches identified at the August 2017 comprehensive inspection had been addressed. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 November 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 DRS Annexe Care Home
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 March 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 Haringey
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. 75 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Over the time he spent with them he got to know our parents very well and became like part of the family, even joining in family celebrations.”
“Violet is a kind and positive, caring person and we are lucky and delighted to have her caring for our 96 year old grandmother.”
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.