CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Edge Hall Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People had individual risk assessments, suitable staffing and safe recruitment arrangements. Medicines were administered by trained staff, but records did not always state whether one or two as-needed tablets had been given.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training, supervision and appraisals, and people were supported with health appointments, nutrition and daily living skills. The home followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act and sought people's consent.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors observed kind, patient and respectful support. People had privacy, were involved in their care planning and were supported to make their own choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support plans recorded people's preferences, communication needs and goals. People chose activities, meals, routines, outings and holidays, and information was available in accessible formats.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an experienced manager and quality checks covering areas such as care, medicines and health and safety. Some records were difficult to locate, and the manager agreed to improve record management and medicines audits.
What inspectors found, December 2018
Edge Hall Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, with some records needing better organisation.
This was an unannounced inspection on 14 and 19 November 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, a relative, staff, managers and health professionals. They looked at care records, medicines, recruitment files, the building and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were supported by suitable staffing levels, trained staff and safe medicines practices. Inspectors saw that people were treated with kindness, respect and dignity, and were supported to make choices and build independence.
There were some record-keeping issues. Some health and safety records were difficult to find, one care record did not reflect current support, and records for as-needed medicines did not always show how many tablets had been given. The registered manager acted quickly during the inspection to improve these areas.
The home had also been rated Good at the previous inspection. CQC said there was no evidence of serious risks or concerns, and the overall rating remained Good.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke very positively about staff. Inspectors saw people being supported in a caring, patient and respectful way.
“This support was given in a polite, caring and patient manner.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make everyday decisions, manage activities and develop practical skills. They could take part in shopping, cooking, volunteering and education.
“Staff also provided support and encouragement for people to take on new tasks and activities which they had not previously been involved with.” from the report
Good understanding of people's needs
Care plans included people's histories, preferences and communication methods. Staff were described as knowing people well and responding to them individually.
“Information about people's personal histories, likes and dislikes were recorded, along with detailed information as to how people communicated to help staff get to know people.” from the report
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found staffing levels met people's needs and recruitment checks helped ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people.
“Recruitment processes were robust and ensured that those staff employed were of suitable character.” from the report
Positive management
Quality checks were in place and action was taken when issues were found. The manager was visible in the home and encouraged people to influence how it was run.
“Quality assurance systems and processes were in place to monitor standards in the care home and to drive forward improvements.” from the report
Records were not always easy to find
minorSome health and safety records were difficult to locate. The manager said a more effective record-management system would be introduced.
“These records were difficult to locate and the registered manager said they would look at introducing a more effective system to support records management.” from the report
One care record was out of date
needs fixingOne person's care record did not reflect their current support at the time of inspection. The manager took swift action to update it.
“We saw one person's records relating to care had not been updated to reflect current support.” from the report
As-needed medicines records
needs fixingWhen as-needed medicines were given, staff did not always record whether one or two tablets had been administered. The manager agreed to improve the checks.
“We saw that when PRN (as required) medicines such as, Paracetamol were administered staff did not always record whether one or two tablets were given.” from the report
Size and layout
minorThe home did not fully meet the guidance about people living in small settings. Inspectors still found that it had a homely atmosphere.
“The size and layout did not support the values of Registering the Right Support, as the guidance recommends that people live in small settings.” from the report
- 01How are you checking that as-needed medicines records now show exactly how many tablets were given?
- 02How have you changed the system for storing and finding health and safety records?
- 03How often are care plans reviewed to make sure they still describe each person's current support?
- 04How does the home's size and layout affect people's choices, independence and daily routines?
- 05What activities, volunteering or education opportunities would be available to my relative?
This was an unannounced inspection of all five rating areas, including the premises and care provided; inspectors reviewed a sample of three care records, 12 medicines records and three staff recruitment files. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 December 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 Edge Hall Care Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 November 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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Sefton
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 £1,270 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
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.