CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Elvy Court Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and monitored, safeguarding systems were in place, staffing was checked, and medicines and infection control were managed safely. Some medicines shortfalls had been identified through audits and were being addressed.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found approachable managers, clear staff roles, regular meetings and audits, and an open culture. The service responded to concerns raised during the inspection and monitored actions for improvement.
What inspectors found, August 2021
Elvy Court Care Home rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and good management, with some medicines and staffing issues being addressed.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 15 and 17 June 2021. One inspector and an Expert by Experience gathered views from people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also reviewed care records, recruitment files, medicines information, audits and other management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found that risks were assessed, staff understood safeguarding, medicines were generally managed safely, and infection control arrangements were suitable. People and relatives mostly said they felt safe and were happy with the care.
The inspection was prompted by concerns about risk assessments and management. Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from these concerns. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were carried forward into the overall Good rating.
People felt safe
People and relatives said staff made them feel safe. Inspectors also found that risks were identified, monitored and managed.
“People and their relatives said staff made them feel safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Feedback described staff as kind, compassionate and accepting. Health professionals also said people were treated with dignity and respect.
“The Staff involve and treat people with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect” from the report
Good management
Managers were described as approachable and visible. There were meetings, audits and action plans to share information and improve the service.
“The culture of the service is positive. As agency I feel part of the team.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked with health and social care professionals, including the GP and specialist nurses, when people needed support.
“Everyone said there was good communication and staff knew people well.” from the report
Medicines records and disposal
needs fixingAudits found some medicines were not dated when opened and some were not disposed of at the end of the monthly cycle. These issues had been or were being addressed through an action plan.
“These audits had highlighted some shortfalls such as dating medicines on opening and not disposing of all medicines at the end of the monthly cycle.” from the report
Staffing feedback
minorSome people raised concerns about staffing levels on the first floor and the use of agency staff. Inspectors found there were enough staff at the time and observed that people were attended to promptly.
“although there were some comments about staffing levels on the first floor and the use of agency staff.” from the report
- 01What actions have been completed to make sure medicines are dated when opened?
- 02How do you check that all medicines are disposed of at the end of each monthly cycle?
- 03How are staffing levels on the first floor matched to residents' assessed needs?
- 04How many agency staff are currently working in the home, and how do you make sure they know residents well?
- 05What are the current action plan items, and how can relatives see progress on them?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 August 2021 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, October 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and better-managed care, although some relatives had concerns about agency staff induction.
Inspectors visited on 22 September 2020. They spoke with six people, staff, managers and four relatives. They observed care, checked four care plans and reviewed medicines, safety records, training, audits and staff allocation records.
The home was rated Good overall, and Good for Safe, Caring and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, risks were managed, medicines were handled safely, staffing levels were sufficient and infection control measures were in place.
The home had previously been rated Requires Improvement and had breached three regulations. Inspectors found enough improvement had been made, so those breaches no longer applied. This was a focused inspection covering Safe, Caring and Well-led. The other ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection.
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found that risks were managed and medicines were ordered, stored and given safely.
“People were helped to safely use medicines in line with national guidelines.” from the report
Dignity and independence
Staff supported privacy and helped people remain independent where they wished. Inspectors saw respectful support with personal care and everyday activities.
“People were assisted to be as independent as they wished.” from the report
Improved oversight
The home had introduced more detailed checks on nursing and personal care, with arrangements to follow up improvements.
“More robust quality checks had been introduced focusing upon people's experience of receiving care.” from the report
Agency staff induction
needs fixingTwo relatives were concerned about staff vacancies and the use of agency staff. One said agency staff did not always seem sure what they were doing and needed a better induction. The manager said four new care staff had been appointed and showed an induction system for agency staff.
“Sometimes the agency staff don't seem to be sure about what they're doing. I think they should be given a better induction.” from the report
- 01How do you check that agency staff understand each person's care needs before working with them?
- 02How will you keep agency staff induction under review and deal with any gaps quickly?
- 03What daily quality checks are carried out on nursing and personal care?
- 04How are changes to a person's risks, medicines or care needs passed between shifts?
- 05What findings from the previous inspection are still being monitored?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Caring and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; Effective and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 October 2020 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 Elvy Court Care Home
6 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- August 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodCaring: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 November 2014.
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.