CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Eros Crescent
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk plans, safe medicines practice and effective infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had assessed needs and care plans. Staff were trained, people were supported with food and healthcare, and the home worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- People had good relationships with staff and were treated with dignity and respect. Staff supported people to make decisions and maintain their independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised to people's preferences, communication needs and relationships. People were supported to follow interests, use the community and raise complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had systems to monitor quality and involve people and staff. Inspectors found an open culture, learning from incidents and partnership working with other organisations.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care that supported people's choices and independence.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 24 February 2020. Inspectors spoke with two people and four staff, observed care, and checked care, medicine, complaints, accident and management records.
The home provides personal and nursing care for four people with learning disabilities and/or mental health needs. Inspectors found enough safely recruited staff, safe medicines practice, suitable care plans, good support from health professionals, and a clean, adapted home.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff supported people to make choices, maintain relationships, take part in activities, and build independence. All five CQC areas were rated Good, which was unchanged from the previous inspection published on 29 September 2017.
Enough staff
Inspectors found there were enough staff to provide the planned one-to-one support and keep people safe.
“People were supported by enough staff to keep them safe.” from the report
Choice and independence
Staff helped people make their own decisions, learn practical skills and become more independent.
“People were supported to make their own decisions.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans reflected people's individual needs, preferences and protected characteristics. People were involved in developing their plans.
“People had their needs assessed and care plans put in place to meet them.” from the report
Community involvement
People were supported to maintain relationships, attend local groups and take part in activities in the community.
“People were supported to follow their interests and go out into the community.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and record my relative's individual needs and preferences?
- 02How would you support my relative to make choices and become more independent?
- 03What one-to-one staffing and community support would be available for my relative?
- 04How would you support my relative's communication needs, relationships and preferred activities?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in reviewing the care plan?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the overall and question ratings unchanged from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 April 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.
What inspectors found, September 2017
Eros Crescent was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with plans to make complaints information more accessible.
This was an unannounced first inspection on 25 August 2017. One inspector reviewed the provider's information, care records, staff files, rotas and quality checks. They also spoke with people, a relative and staff, and observed care in communal areas.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe and were treated kindly. Staff knew people's needs and preferences, and there were enough staff to provide the planned support.
Inspectors found that medicines were managed safely, staff were trained, people had choices about daily life and food, and people could access health professionals and activities. Care plans were detailed and individual. The home had a positive atmosphere and managers used checks to identify and act on issues.
Individual risk support
Risks were assessed for each person and updated when new information was identified. Staff followed these plans while supporting people's independence.
“People's risks were assessed and managed individually to promote their safety and wellbeing.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw relaxed and friendly relationships. Staff respected privacy and encouraged people to make their own choices.
“People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff who knew them well.” from the report
Personalised care plans
Care plans included people's histories, preferences and interests. Staff used this information to provide care in ways that suited each person.
“Each person who used the service had a detailed plan of care that was individual to them.” from the report
Activities and independence
People were supported to take part in activities they chose, both inside and outside the home. Staff encouraged people to do tasks for themselves.
“This showed that staff were responsive and proactive in ensuring people could access activities they were interested in.” from the report
Quality checks
Managers checked medicines, care plans, the environment, infection control and vehicle safety. They investigated discrepancies and updated plans after incidents.
“The registered manager, coordinator and team leader completed audits to monitor the quality of the service” from the report
Complaints information
minorA complaints procedure was in place, but the home had not received any complaints and planned to introduce a more accessible version for people using the service.
“The registered manager told us on their Provider Information Return (PIR) that they had plans to introduce a more accessible complaints policy for people who used the service.” from the report
- 01Has the more accessible complaints policy now been introduced, and how can my relative use it?
- 02How will my relative's individual risks be reviewed and updated as their needs change?
- 03How will my relative be supported to make their own choices and take part in activities they enjoy?
- 04How are medicines given when needed, and how are records checked for accuracy?
- 05How will staff support my relative to build independence in everyday tasks?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering the overall quality of the home and all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 September 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 Eros Crescent
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 September 2016.
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 Stoke-on-Trent
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 £1,190 a week. 93 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“She's shown compassion, patience and a level of understanding that no other carer has given.”
“She maintained a great environment for mum both with the tidiness and cleanliness of the house and Mum and with her caring and understanding attitude.”
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.