CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at DRS Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from avoidable harm. Risk assessments, staffing, recruitment, medicines and infection control were managed safely, although inspectors raised a concern about a fire exit door that needed a key to open.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed, care plans were personalised, staff were trained, and people were supported with food, drink and access to health professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a person-centred culture, supportive management, clear responsibilities and effective checks on care quality, medicines, health and safety.
What inspectors found, November 2022
DRS Care Home rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, effective and well-led care, but noted a concern about a fire exit door.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 23 September 2022. One inspector met all four people living in the home, spoke with relatives and staff, and reviewed care records, medicines, recruitment files and management checks.
The inspection followed concerns about management, staffing, recruitment and medicines. Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from these concerns. They found suitable staffing, safe medicines management, detailed risk assessments, trained staff and a clean, well-maintained home.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were rated Good. Caring and Responsive were not assessed during this visit, so the previous ratings for those areas were carried forward from the last comprehensive inspection.
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found there were enough suitably qualified staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks were completed before staff started work.
“There were suitable numbers of qualified staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored securely, records were accurate and audits were completed. Staff also worked with health professionals to reduce the use of some medicines when other approaches helped.
“People received their medicines safely as prescribed.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's individual needs, communication and sensory needs, health needs and aspirations. Staff supported people to make choices and take part in daily tasks.
“People's care plans were up to date, personalised, and reflected their current needs and aspirations” from the report
Supportive management
Relatives and staff spoke positively about the management team. The home used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor and improve care.
“The registered manager, and staff team promoted an inclusive and person-centred culture.” from the report
Fire exit door
minorInspectors raised a safety concern because a fire exit door needed a key before it could be released during a fire. The fire authority later confirmed that the provider had assessed the risks and put suitable mitigating measures in place.
“During the inspection we expressed concerns about people's safety in relation to a fire exit door which required staff to use a key before this could be released in the event of a fire.” from the report
- 01How can the fire exit door be opened in an emergency, and what mitigating measures are currently in place?
- 02How do you make sure there are enough qualified staff on every shift, particularly when staff from other homes cover shifts?
- 03How will you involve our relative and us in the person's care plan, communication needs and choices?
- 04What progress has been made with introducing the electronic care planning system?
- 05How are medicines audits and the reduction of 'when required' medicines monitored over time?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 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, January 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with a window safety issue to assess.
This was an unannounced inspection by two inspectors on 21 November 2019. They met all four residents, observed staff supporting them, spoke with three staff members and four relatives, and checked care, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with respect, supported to make choices and helped to maintain relationships, activities and healthcare.
Inspectors noted that window restrictors in residents' rooms could open beyond safe limits. The manager said this would be risk assessed for each person. The home remained rated Good overall, as did its previous inspection in June 2017.
People felt safe
Relatives said they trusted staff and felt the home was safe. Staff understood safeguarding and how to reduce risks.
“People trusted the staff and felt safe with them.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed caring relationships. Staff respected people's dignity, privacy, equality and individual preferences.
“Staff developed caring relationships with people using the service and we observed staff treating people with respect and compassion.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, preferences, relationships and communication needs. Residents had individual activity programmes.
“Everyone had an individual plan of care which was reviewed on a regular basis.” from the report
Good staff preparation
Staff received induction, training, supervision and appraisals. They understood people's health needs and how to support them.
“Staff told us, and records showed that they were provided with the training they needed to support people effectively.” from the report
Open management
The home used audits, surveys and feedback from residents, relatives and healthcare professionals to support improvement.
“The registered manager told us that all the information captured by the various quality assurance systems fed into a larger service improvement plan which was regularly discussed with the provider and staff.” from the report
Window restrictors
needs fixingWindow restrictors in residents' rooms could be opened beyond safe limits. The manager said the issue would be risk assessed for each person, so families should ask what action followed.
“We noted that window restrictors in people's rooms could be opened beyond safe limits.” from the report
- 01What risk assessments were completed for the window restrictors, and what action was taken afterwards?
- 02How will you learn and support my relative's individual way of communicating choices, consent and concerns?
- 03How will my relative's health needs, appointments and advice from healthcare professionals be recorded and followed?
- 04What activities and community links would be available for my relative?
- 05How would you involve our family in care planning and respond if we raised a concern?
This inspection covered the residential care service only; the two move-on supported living units in the garden were not included. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 January 2020 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 Care Home
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 December 2010.
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.