CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Falconer's Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Inspectors found enough staff, effective risk assessments, safe medicines management and suitable infection-control arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training, supervision and support. People were helped with healthy eating, healthcare appointments and communication, and the accommodation was adapted to their needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff promoted privacy, dignity, independence and involvement in decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences, needs and communication methods. People were supported with individual activities, family contact and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and staff were viewed positively. The home used audits, feedback and partnership working to monitor and improve the service.
What inspectors found, October 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with a minor issue about references in some recruitment files.
This was an unannounced inspection on 21 August 2018. Inspectors observed care, spoke with people, relatives, staff, the manager and local authority commissioners, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
The inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines systems and suitable checks to manage risks. People were treated with kindness and respect. Their care was based on their individual needs, choices and communication styles.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found the service met the CQC standards at the time of this inspection, although they still noted a small recruitment-record issue.
Staff knew people well
Staff understood people's routines, preferences, communication needs and goals. This helped care remain personal and consistent.
“Staff knew about people's backgrounds, their preferences, likes and dislikes and their hopes and goals.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw positive interactions and staff responding sensitively to people's emotions. Privacy and dignity were protected during personal care.
“People received person-centred care and were treated with kindness and respect.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff were trained and checked for competence. Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely, with no gaps in the records reviewed.
“The records were up to date and had no gaps, showing all medicines administered had been signed for.” from the report
Individual activities and choice
People were supported to take part in activities they chose, both in the home and in the community. They were also involved in menus and care planning.
“Activities were planned on an individual basis based upon the person's own individual wishes.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the leadership. The home used regular checks and feedback to monitor quality.
“Throughout the inspection, the registered manager was seen talking to people and staff in their office and told us that they operated an open-door policy” from the report
Some recruitment files had one reference
minorThe provider's policy required two written references. One staff file had two references and two had one, although inspectors accepted that the previous provider's policy had been followed and that other required checks were present.
“One member of staff had two references and two members of staff had one reference.” from the report
- 01What is the current position on the applications for legal authorisation relating to the people living here?
- 02How do you make sure all new staff have the required references and other pre-employment checks?
- 03How are staffing levels adjusted when people's needs, health appointments or activities change?
- 04How are people's individual communication methods, preferences and activity goals kept up to date?
- 05What changed after the recent provider takeover, and how has this affected the people living here?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and reviewing a sample of care, medicines, staffing and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 October 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 Falconer's Court
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- October 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 October 2017.
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.