CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Evergreen
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, safeguarding procedures were understood, staffing was adequate and medicines were administered safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and skills, people were supported with food, drink and healthcare, and the home worked within the Mental Capacity Act. One person's food and fluid chart had not been evaluated daily, but this was corrected during the inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed being kind and respectful. People were supported to make choices, maintain independence and have relatives involved where appropriate.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's goals, preferences and communication needs. People were supported to go out, maintain relationships and raise complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and staff were described as approachable and committed. Audits, feedback and incident reviews were used to identify and make improvements.
What inspectors found, June 2019
Evergreen was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records and staff knowledge needing attention.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 17 May 2019. One inspector met everyone living at the home, observed staff, spoke with staff, relatives and health professionals, and checked care, medicines, staffing and management records.
The home supported up to eight adults with acquired brain injury and/or mental health needs. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, risks were managed, medicines were given safely, and there were enough suitably trained staff.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The report says legal requirements were met in relation to safety. The overall rating was unchanged from the previous Good rating published on 29 April 2016.
Risks were managed
Care risks were assessed in detail, including risks linked to seizures, choking and evacuation. Staff knew how to reduce these risks.
“Risks associated with people's care and support were well assessed and showed clearly how these risks could be minimised.” from the report
Kind staff
Inspectors saw staff focus on the person rather than simply completing tasks. People appeared relaxed and comfortable with staff.
“We observed kind and caring interactions between staff and people throughout our inspection.” from the report
Personalised support
People's care plans included their wishes, goals and communication needs. They were supported to make choices and take part in activities outside the home.
“People were supported to live full and active lives.” from the report
Good oversight
The management team used audits, feedback and incident reviews to monitor care and make changes. Staff meetings were also used to discuss improvements.
“The registered manager had completed audits in relation to the environment, health and safety, medication and accidents and incidents.” from the report
Daily nutrition records
needs fixingOne person's food and fluid chart was not being evaluated every day. The report says this was addressed during the inspection and changes were made.
“Whilst people's food and fluid intakes were closely monitored one person's food and fluid chart for their individual nutritional intake was not evaluated on a daily basis.” from the report
Staff knowledge of restrictions
needs fixingSome staff did not consistently know which people had legal authorisation for restrictions on their liberty. The manager said this would be addressed after the inspection.
“Whilst we did not see people being supported in restrictive ways some staff we spoke with did not consistently know which people had authorised DoLS.” from the report
Further quality monitoring
minorThe home was considering a new system to improve its overall oversight, although the inspectors found that existing evidence was recorded.
“Whilst this evidence was all recorded, the service were considering developing a new system to improve the overall oversight of the service.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that food and fluid charts are evaluated every day when required?
- 02How do you make sure every staff member knows about any authorised restrictions on a person's liberty?
- 03What changes have you made to improve overall oversight of the service since the inspection?
- 04How are people's individual goals, communication needs and preferences reviewed with them and their relatives?
- 05How are medicines staff competency checks kept up to date?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at the premises and care provided and assessed all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 June 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.
Every inspection of Evergreen
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 January 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 Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.