Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Eastcote Park Care Home

Goodpublished 25 May 2022, 4 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
People felt safe, risks were assessed and managed, and inspectors found enough staff. Medicines were generally administered safely, but guidance for some as-required medicines and records about medicine patches needed improvement.
Effective?
Good
Staff had suitable training and people received support with food, drink, healthcare and oral health. Inspectors noted that visual prompts for bedrooms might be needed if people living with dementia later required them.
Caring?
Good
People said staff were kind and supportive. People were involved in their care plans, listened to through a residents' forum and treated with dignity and respect.
Responsive?
Good
Care plans reflected people's routines, preferences and communication needs. The home offered varied activities and spiritual support, but more detail was needed about people's religious, cultural and personal wishes at the end of life.
Well-led?
Good
Inspectors found an open and inclusive culture, regular meetings and governance systems to monitor quality. One relative said the home could have responded more quickly to requests for referrals and reports of concerns.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, May 2022

Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some medicines and end-of-life planning improvements still needed.

This was the first inspection since the home registered. Inspectors visited on 11 May 2022, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records. They also checked infection prevention and control.

People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines systems, personalised care plans and a wide choice of activities. People were supported to make choices and to maintain relationships, interests and religious needs.

Inspectors identified some improvements. Guidance for some as-required medicines needed to be clearer, checks on medicine patches were not consistently recorded, and more information was needed about people's personal and cultural wishes at the end of life. The home said it would take action.

The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the home's first inspection, so there was no previous rating to compare with.

What inspectors praised
  • Personalised care

    Care plans were written with people and relatives and reflected individual preferences, beliefs and values.

    “Care plans were developed in partnership with people and their relatives to ensure they were in line with people's preferences, religious and cultural beliefs and values.” from the report
  • Kind and respectful staff

    People spoke highly of staff and inspectors saw thoughtful support that helped people feel included and comfortable.

    “People were very happy with the care they received. They said staff were like 'best friends' and all felt they received a high standard of care.” from the report
  • Activities and friendships

    The home offered a broad programme of activities and spaces where people could follow interests, meet others and maintain social and spiritual connections.

    “People were encouraged to engage in a wide range of activities to enable them to follow their interests and develop new ones.” from the report
  • Staff training and support

    Staff training was up to date, and new staff were supported through induction and time working with experienced colleagues.

    “Staff training was up to date. Staff said training was good and easy to access.” from the report
  • Open management

    People, relatives and staff described the management as supportive and approachable. Inspectors found regular meetings and systems to monitor quality.

    “People and relatives were positive about the registered manager and the culture of the home which we saw was open, friendly and inclusive.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • As-required medicine guidance

    needs fixing

    Some guidance for medicines taken when needed was not clear or person-centred enough to ensure they were always given consistently. The deputy manager said this would be reviewed.

    “We found clearer, more person-centred guidelines would ensure these were always given consistently.” from the report
  • Medicine patch records

    needs fixing

    There was no daily recorded check that medicine patches stayed in place, and staff did not consistently record where patches had been applied. New systems were put in place during the inspection.

    “There was no system of daily recorded checks to ensure the patches remained in place and staff were not consistently recording the site of application.” from the report
  • Dementia-friendly signs

    minor

    Bedrooms on the dementia care floor did not have items such as photographs or memory boxes to help people identify them. The manager said these would be introduced if needed.

    “The top floor of the home supported people living with dementia, but there was nothing to help people identify individual bedrooms such as photographs or memory boxes.” from the report
  • End-of-life wishes

    needs fixing

    Care plans included emergency treatment information, but did not fully record people's religious, cultural and personal wishes for their final days. The manager had identified this for improvement.

    “We found further information in respect of any religious, cultural or personal wishes would ensure people spent their final days as they wished to.” from the report
  • Speed of responses

    minor

    One relative felt the home could have acted more quickly when making referrals and reporting concerns. This was feedback about responsiveness rather than a stated breach.

    “One relative said the home could have been quicker to respond to requests for making referrals and to report concerns.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What changes have you made to the guidance for as-required medicines, and how do you check that staff follow it consistently?
  2. 02How do you now record daily checks that medicine patches remain in place and where each patch was applied?
  3. 03How will you record a person's religious, cultural and personal wishes for end-of-life care?
  4. 04If a person living with dementia needs help finding their bedroom, what visual prompts can you provide?
  5. 05How quickly do you respond to requests for healthcare referrals and concerns raised by relatives?

This was the first inspection and covered all five key questions, as well as infection prevention and control; it also included a separate thematic probe about oral health care. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 May 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Eastcote Park Care Home

Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.

  1. May 2022Goodcurrent rating
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Eastcote Park Care Home →

  2. February 2021

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 February 2021.

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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Solihull

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. 9 years' experience on average.

“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
Caroline C., about Mary K.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
Brian G., about Chris M.
See live-in carers near SolihullProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.