CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Edward Street
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks, medicines, staffing, infection control and emergency arrangements were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed with their involvement. Staff had suitable training, and people were supported with food, healthcare, activities and independence.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions and supported to maintain relationships and control over their lives.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised. The home supported people's communication, interests, community links, complaints and end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open, inclusive culture and approachable management. Quality checks were used to monitor safety and make improvements.
What inspectors found, June 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas they assessed.
The inspection visit took place on 10 May 2019. One inspector spoke with all six people using the service, the registered manager, other managers and six staff. The inspector reviewed care records, medicines records, training, recruitment and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, received their medicines safely and were supported by suitably skilled staff.
People were involved in their care and supported to make choices, build independence and take part in community activities. Staff were described as kind and respectful, and care plans were personalised. This was the first inspection since the service registered with CQC in May 2018.
Choice and independence
People were supported to control their lives, make choices and take positive risks as part of becoming more independent.
“People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People said staff treated them well. Inspectors saw warm relationships and staff who knew people's histories, preferences and communication methods.
“People told us staff always treated them with dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected individual needs and preferences. People were supported with goals, hobbies, community activities and assistive technology.
“People received care and support that was tailored to meet their individual needs, and offered flexibility, choice and continuity of care.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff were trained and checked as competent before giving medicines. People said they received medicines at the right time and in their preferred way.
“Medicines were safely managed and administered to people at the right time.” from the report
Quality monitoring
Managers used checks, meetings and feedback to monitor care and identify improvements. The report found a caring and inclusive culture.
“Effective systems were in place to check on the quality and safety of the service and improvements were made when required.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you review my relative's care plan and goals with them, and how often will this happen?
- 02How do you record and review medicines given when required, including whether they were effective?
- 03What communication aids or assistive technology could you provide for my relative?
- 04How are people supported to take positive risks while keeping safety arrangements under review?
- 05How can my relative or family raise a complaint, and how will we be told what action was taken?
This was a planned inspection of the care provided and the premises, covering all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 June 2019 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 Edward Street
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- June 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 April 2018.
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 Halton
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. 89 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“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.”
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.