CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Eglington
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, emergency arrangements, staffing levels, recruitment checks and medicines systems, although the kitchen and toilet areas needed deep cleaning.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before they moved in. Staff received training and supervision, and people were supported with food, healthcare and recovery plans.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw kind and compassionate interactions. People were involved in care planning, and their privacy, dignity, cultural needs and independence were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were based on individual needs and included personal and medical histories. People were supported with activities, work or courses, family relationships and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People and staff said the home was well managed. The provider used audits, meetings and surveys to monitor quality and make improvements.
What inspectors found, April 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some areas needing deep cleaning.
This was an unannounced inspection on 24 and 29 January 2018. Inspectors spoke with five people, the registered provider and three staff. They reviewed care plans, staff records, medicines information, audits and other records, and contacted health and social care professionals.
The home was supporting six people with mental health needs. Inspectors found that people felt safe, staff were kind, medicines were managed safely and care was planned around people's needs. People were supported with health appointments, activities, family relationships and steps towards greater independence.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as at the previous inspection on 9 December 2015. Inspectors said the home continued to meet the regulations and fundamental standards.
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored, administered and recorded appropriately. Most people self-medicated, with checks and extra support when needed.
“People's medicines were reviewed regularly to ensure they were effective and supporting their recovery.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People described staff as kind and compassionate. Inspectors observed a friendly and relaxed atmosphere, with staff respecting privacy and dignity.
“We observed positive interactions between people and staff.” from the report
Involvement in care
People helped shape their care plans and set goals with key workers. Their views were recorded and taken into account.
“People were involved in making decisions regarding their care and support needs and people's views were taken into consideration when planning their care.” from the report
Support with recovery
The home supported people to build daily living skills, access the community, take part in activities and work towards independent living.
“People achieved positive outcomes whilst using the service and their physical, mental and social health had improved.” from the report
Deep cleaning needed
minorThe home was generally clean, but inspectors said the kitchen and toilet areas needed deep cleaning. The management team said they knew about this and planned a cleaning exercise.
“We saw that the home was generally clean but needed deep cleaning in the kitchen and toilet areas.” from the report
- 01What deep cleaning has been completed in the kitchen and toilet areas since the inspection?
- 02How will you assess whether my relative's mental health, physical health and recovery needs can be met before they move in?
- 03How are medicines managed for people who self-medicate, and what extra support is provided if someone's health changes?
- 04What activities, education, voluntary work or community support could my relative take part in?
- 05How will my relative be involved in writing and reviewing their care plan and recovery goals?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, including all five key questions and both the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 April 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 Eglington
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 April 2015.
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 Greenwich
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. 87 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
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.