CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Elm House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, managed testing, cleaned frequently touched areas and had arrangements to prevent or manage infection outbreaks. The provider also had measures to reduce the effect of COVID-19-related staff pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Targeted infection-control inspection; inspectors were assured by the home’s COVID-19 safety measures, but the service was not rated.
Inspectors visited on 5 January 2022. This was an announced, targeted inspection focused on infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
They found that the home had measures for visitors, testing, PPE, cleaning, social distancing and managing possible outbreaks. Staff were also taking steps to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
The inspectors said they were assured about the infection-control arrangements. The home was inspected but not rated, so this visit did not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other care areas.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements for PPE, testing, hygiene, social distancing and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Cleaning
Staff cleaned frequently touched parts of the home regularly to support infection control.
“Frequently touched areas such as light switches, handles and handrails were cleaned by staff every two to three hours.” from the report
Keeping in touch
Staff supported people to use tablets and phones to communicate with family and friends when visits were limited.
“Staff supported people to use computer tablets and phones to video call and/or communicate with family and friends.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
The home allowed visits in line with current guidance, with testing, temperature checks and PPE requirements.
“We were assured the provider was facilitating visits for people living in the home in accordance with the current guidance.” from the report
Further development identified
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach. The report does not explain which part of the approach needed development.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made since inspectors signposted you to resources to develop your infection-control approach?
- 02What are the current rules for family and friends visiting the home?
- 03How do you support people who become anxious about COVID-19 testing?
- 04How do you cover shifts when staff are unwell or self-isolating because of COVID-19?
- 05How often are frequently touched areas cleaned now?
This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other key questions or give an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 February 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.
What inspectors found, August 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a medicines storage temperature issue being addressed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 18 July 2017. One inspector looked at records, observed care, spoke with two people, the deputy manager and two care staff, and reviewed medicines, staffing, training, risks and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, personalised care plans, staff training and support with health, food, activities and community access.
People were supported to make choices and maintain their independence. Staff were described as warm, friendly, respectful and knowledgeable about people's needs. One medicines storage area was above the recommended temperature, but an interim measure had been put in place while the air conditioning was repaired.
The overall rating remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection on 19 May 2015.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Extra staff were arranged when people needed support on trips or holidays.
“People told us, and we saw, that there were enough staff available to meet their needs.” from the report
Choice and dignity
People were offered choices about their daily lives and where they spent time. Staff knocked before entering bedrooms and supported independence.
“People told us they were given choices in all aspects of their lives.” from the report
Personalised care plans
Care plans reflected individual needs and preferences. Pictorial versions helped people understand the support they needed.
“Care plans were also created in a pictorial format to help people understand the support they required from staff.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider used regular audits covering areas such as medicines, training and care planning. Records showed action was taken when shortfalls were found.
“The registered manager and provider continued to carry out a regular programme of audits to assess and monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
Medicines storage temperature
needs fixingThe temperature of the medicines storage area was above the recommended limits during the inspection. An interim measure had been put in place while the air conditioning unit was repaired.
“During our visit we noted that the temperature of the storage area was above the recommended limits.” from the report
- 01Has the air conditioning unit for the medicines storage area now been repaired?
- 02How are medicines storage temperatures checked and recorded each day?
- 03How will my relative's choices about daily routines, activities and community outings be recorded in their care plan?
- 04How often will my relative's care plan and risk assessments be reviewed, and how will they be involved?
- 05What support will be available from staff if my relative wants to see family, use advocacy or take part in activities?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including observations, discussions and records relating to two people's care, medicines, staffing, training, risks and quality monitoring. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 August 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 Elm House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 December 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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Cambridgeshire
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 £1,020 to £1,200 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
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.