CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Drummonds
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors looked specifically at safeguarding, medicines and infection prevention and control. They found trained staff, safe medicines systems, safeguarding arrangements, suitable testing and effective use of protective equipment, but did not review the whole Safe question.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found safe medicines practice, safeguarding arrangements and good infection control.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 15 February 2021. It followed concerns about infection control and the dispensing of medicines. One inspector spoke with the manager and care staff, contacted professionals, and checked records and policies.
Inspectors found that staff were trained in infection control and used personal protective equipment safely. The home had enough protective equipment, testing arrangements and measures to reduce the spread of infection. Medicines were administered by trained staff, with audits and arrangements for dealing with concerns such as refused medicines.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give a new overall rating or a new rating for Safe. The previous overall rating was Good, from an inspection published in 2018, and the report says that rating remained Good.
Infection control
Staff used protective equipment safely. The home had testing arrangements, suitable supplies and changes to the layout to support social distancing.
“We were assured the service was following correct infection prevention and control guidance and policy to protect people from infection and prevent the spread of infection.” from the report
Safe medicines
Trained staff administered medicines. Regular audits were completed and there were arrangements for escalating concerns, including when someone refused medicine.
“Systems were in place to manage people's medicines safely. Staff were trained in the administration of medicines.” from the report
Safeguarding
The manager investigated safeguarding concerns and made external referrals when needed. Staff had training and knew how to report possible abuse.
“Staff had been trained in safeguarding, knew the signs to look for that people might be being abused and how to report any concerns.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you check that staff continue to use personal protective equipment correctly?
- 02How often are medicines audits completed, and what happens when an audit identifies a problem?
- 03What is your process when a person refuses their medicine?
- 04How are safeguarding concerns investigated and reported to the local authority or CQC?
- 05How will you show families that the standards found in this targeted inspection are being maintained?
This was a targeted inspection of specific concerns about infection control and medicines, with some safeguarding checks; it did not assess all areas or give new ratings, so the previous Good overall rating from 2018 carries over. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 March 2021 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, May 2018
Drummonds was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care and outstanding personalisation, with no breaches reported.
This was an unannounced inspection on 26 and 27 February 2018. One inspector spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and reviewed care files, training records, medicines records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective, caring and well-led services. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, well-managed medicines, suitable training, good healthcare support and respectful care.
The home was rated Outstanding for being responsive. Inspectors found that care was highly personalised, people were supported to make choices and stay independent, and activities were shaped around their interests and communication needs.
An overall Good rating means the service met the relevant standards at the time of this inspection. It does not mean every part was perfect, but inspectors found no breaches of regulations.
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences, strengths and communication styles. Staff used this information to provide care in the way each person preferred.
“These were fully person centred and gave detailed guidance for staff so that staff could consistently deliver the care and support the person needed” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in decisions about food, rooms, activities and staff recruitment. Staff supported people to take sensible risks and pursue education, work and community interests.
“Staff always worked hard to promote people's independence through encouraging and supporting people to make informed decisions.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw positive relationships between people and staff. Staff gave people time to respond and treated them with dignity and respect.
“Staff cared for people in an empathetic and kind manner.” from the report
Strong activities and communication
People could take part in activities they chose, both at home and in the community. The home also used pictures, objects, communication cards and electronic aids to help people express themselves.
“The service was extremely person-centred.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored securely, records were checked and staff understood people's medicines and possible side effects. The home also reviewed whether medicines were still needed.
“We reviewed medication administration records and found these to be in good order.” from the report
No registered manager during the visit
minorThe home did not have a registered manager when inspectors visited because the manager was newly appointed. The report later confirmed that the manager successfully registered.
“At the time of our inspection, the service did not have a registered manager, as the manager had been newly appointed” from the report
- 01What has changed since the February 2018 inspection, particularly in staffing, management and care planning?
- 02How are people currently involved in choosing activities, food, room arrangements and new staff?
- 03How do staff support people who communicate without speech, and what communication aids are available now?
- 04Has the planned work to address uneven flooring and install grab rails been completed?
- 05How are medicines reviewed now, including checks for side effects and whether medicines are still needed?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 May 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 Drummonds
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- October 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 October 2016.
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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.