CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Eve House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including visitors, testing, protective equipment, cleaning, social distancing and safe admissions.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Eve House was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about its COVID-19 infection prevention measures.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 23 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than providing a full inspection of the service.
Inspectors found good measures for visitors, including temperature checks, appointments and personal protective equipment. Staff supported social distancing, used single bedrooms and en-suite facilities, and kept rooms well ventilated.
The home had regular COVID-19 testing, plenty of protective equipment and cleaning supplies. High-touch areas were cleaned every two hours, and staff had training in COVID-19 awareness, testing and using protective equipment.
The service was inspected but not rated. The report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other care questions.
Visitor safety
Visitors had to follow entry rules, including temperature checks and wearing protective equipment. Family visits were arranged in advance.
“Visitors to the home (professional and relatives) must comply with rules to be allowed entry.” from the report
Testing and protective equipment
Staff were tested three times a week and people living at the home every 28 days. Protective equipment was available throughout the home.
“Staff were required to take a COVID-19 test three times a week and people were tested every 28 days.” from the report
Cleaning
High-touch areas were cleaned every two hours, with equipment and cleaning products available.
“Two hourly cleaning of high touch areas such as door handles, light switches and handrails was maintained.” from the report
Updated infection control arrangements
Staff had relevant COVID-19 training, and the infection control policy and risk assessments were updated when government guidance changed.
“The provider's Infection Prevention Control (IPC) policy and risk assessments were reviewed and updated when new government guidance had been issued.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How often are visitors currently required to book appointments and use protective equipment?
- 02How often are staff and people living at the home tested now?
- 03How are high-touch areas cleaned, and how often?
- 04What infection control training do staff currently receive?
- 05Can you share the latest full ratings or inspection information for care areas not covered by this targeted inspection?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 April 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, September 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some audits needing more detail.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 29 August 2018. They observed care, spoke with staff, relatives and health professionals, and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practices, suitable training, respectful care and support tailored to people's needs.
There had been concerns about Effective and Well-led at the January 2017 inspection. Inspectors said improvements had been made, and both areas were now rated Good. They noted that some audits could still have been completed in more detail.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were given as prescribed, with staff working in pairs and having their competence checked.
“People received the correct medication at the right time.” from the report
Respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported them with patience, choice and respect. Inspectors saw staff protecting people's privacy and dignity.
“People living at the home were treated with kindness and respect by the staff.” from the report
Improved staff skills
Training had improved since the previous inspection. Staff files showed relevant training, including the Care Certificate for new starters.
“People were supported by staff who had received relevant and up to date training.” from the report
Personalised support and activities
People had personalised care plans and were supported to access the local community, day trips and holidays.
“People had lots of opportunities to access the local and wider community.” from the report
Better oversight
The provider had introduced monthly audits covering care plans, records, health and safety and finances. Inspectors said the improvements identified at the previous inspection had been made.
“The provider had introduced a new audit system for the registered manager and deputy manager to complete” from the report
Some audits lacked detail
minorInspectors said some earlier audits had sections that were incomplete or very brief. They still found that the issues identified had been acted on.
“These audits could have been completed in more detail as some sections were not completed or were very brief.” from the report
One authorisation had expired
needs fixingOne person's Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisation had expired, although a new application had been submitted. Ask how this was resolved and how current authorisations are monitored.
“One DoLS had expired but a new application had been submitted.” from the report
- 01How do you check that every person's Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisation is current and that any conditions are followed?
- 02How have you improved the detail and completeness of your quality audits since this inspection?
- 03How do you make sure staff follow each person's swallowing, diet and other health professional recommendations?
- 04How are relatives involved in care reviews, and how often will my relative's care plan be reviewed?
- 05What activities and community outings would be suitable for my relative's communication and health needs?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and included observations, discussions with relatives and professionals, and checks of care, medicines, staffing and quality records. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 September 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 Eve House
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 December 2011.
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 Dudley
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 £1,230 a week. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
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.