CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ellens Court Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found that risks, medicines, staffing, infection control and emergency arrangements were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the training, skills and experience needed to support people. People were supported with food, health appointments, dental care and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported independence, family relationships and involvement in everyday decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised around people's interests, preferences and communication needs. People were supported to take part in activities, trips, holidays and discussions about their care.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team was described as supportive and approachable. Quality checks had been strengthened, and people's, relatives' and staff views were sought.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Ellens Court Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind, personalised care and stronger quality checks.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 12 and 21 November 2019. One inspector spoke with five people, four relatives and five staff. They reviewed care, medicines, training, safety records, meetings and quality checks, and contacted other professionals after the visit.
The inspectors found that people were safe and received their medicines properly. Staff knew people well, understood their needs and supported them to make choices, stay active and follow their interests. People were supported to access health care, eat well and maintain relationships.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. In this report, Good means people's outcomes were consistently good and feedback supported this. The overall rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published on 17 March 2017.
Staff knew people well
Staff understood people's communication, behaviour, history and preferences. Relatives said this helped people feel safe and settled.
“Staff knew people well and communicated in a way that made people feel safe.” from the report
Safe medicines
People received medicines when they needed them. Staff were trained and observed to check that they administered medicines safely.
“People received their medicines when they needed them. Medicines continued to be managed safely.” from the report
Active and independent lives
People helped with shopping, cooking and their home. They were supported to follow hobbies, go on trips and take holidays.
“Staffing levels ensured people led active lives and could follow their interests.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors found trusting relationships between people and staff. People were involved in daily decisions and supported to maintain family relationships.
“People continued to be treated in a kind and caring manner.” from the report
Improved oversight
The home's checks and audits had been strengthened since the previous inspection. These checks covered all areas and identified improvements and lessons.
“The programme of checks and audits had been strengthened since the last inspection.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What progress has been made with the planned redevelopment, including the covered walkway to the laundry and dining rooms?
- 02How will people be supported and kept warm while the gas and electricity supply is changed?
- 03How are staffing levels matched to each person's one-to-one hours, activities and trips out?
- 04How are people's changing oral health needs and end of life wishes kept up to date in their care plans?
- 05If we are considering home care or supported living, is that service now operating and how many people are receiving it?
This was a planned inspection of the care home and its care, accommodation, records and management; the registered home care and supported living service was not providing personal care at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 December 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.
What inspectors found, March 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with some records, training and monitoring still being improved.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 7 and 13 February 2017. One inspector spoke with five people living at the home, two relatives, staff, the registered manager and health and social care professionals. The inspector also checked care files, medicines records, staff records, training, rotas, complaints, incidents and quality checks.
People were supported safely. Inspectors found enough suitably recruited staff, safe medicines management, safeguarding training and individual risk assessments. Staff supported people to make choices, stay as independent as possible, eat and drink well, access healthcare and take part in activities inside and outside the home.
People appeared happy and comfortable, and relatives spoke positively about the care. The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors also found that some refresher training, care file organisation, policies and quality monitoring needed further work.
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff with the right experience and training. Recruitment checks included employment histories, references and DBS checks.
“There were sufficient staff with a mix of skills on duty to support people with their needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored securely and records were clear. Guidance was available for medicines prescribed when needed.
“Medicines were managed well, helping to keep people safe from errors being made.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in care planning, meal planning, shopping and activities. Staff supported people to develop skills and remain involved in their communities.
“People were encouraged and supported to be as independent as possible.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People appeared happy and comfortable. Staff were seen having positive conversations with people and respecting their privacy and dignity.
“We observed staff being respectful of people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Individual care planning
Care plans included personal histories, interests, communication needs and preferred ways of receiving support. People and, where appropriate, relatives were involved in reviews.
“People had a person centred plan that had all the personal information known about the person.” from the report
Approachable leadership
People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the registered manager. Staff said they could raise concerns and that team communication was good.
“There was an open and inclusive culture which focused on people.” from the report
Refresher training
needs fixingSome staff needed further refresher training to update their knowledge and skills. Further training was planned during 2017.
“However, further refresher training was required for some staff to update their knowledge and skills.” from the report
Quality monitoring
needs fixingQuality checks had started but were not yet fully developed. The provider and manager were still building systems to monitor and improve the service.
“Effective systems to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided were in the early stages of development.” from the report
Out-of-date policies
minorSome policies still referred to the previous provider. The report says these were being updated as a priority.
“Some of the registered provider's policies and procedures were out of date as they referred to the previous provider.” from the report
Property updates
minorThe home was described as homely, but parts of the property needed updating. Refurbishments were planned.
“The property was homely but required updating. The registered provider had taken over the management of the home in November 2015 and planned refurbishments to enhance the facilities for people.” from the report
- 01Which refresher training was still outstanding after the inspection, and has all of it now been completed?
- 02How were the care files reorganised, and how do you check that staff can quickly find the latest information?
- 03What quality audits are now carried out, and what improvements have resulted from them?
- 04Have the policies referring to the previous provider been updated?
- 05Which refurbishments were planned, and what work has been completed since the inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC questions and reviewing care, medicines, staffing, records, complaints, incidents and quality systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 March 2017 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 Ellens Court Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 November 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.