CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Forrester Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, April 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with earlier staffing and governance improvements completed.
Inspectors visited on 19 and 26 February 2018. The first visit was unannounced. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, contacted health and social care professionals, and reviewed care records, staff files and management records.
The home supported 98 people at the time, with places for up to 113. Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, safe medicines systems, detailed care plans and good support with food, health needs and end of life care.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Their choices, cultural needs and personal routines were included in care planning. The home offered varied activities and responded to complaints and feedback.
The overall rating was Good. All five areas were rated Good. The report says action requested after the previous inspection about staffing levels and governance had been completed.
Staffing improved
Inspectors found enough staff on duty and said staff did not seem rushed. The report says action from the previous inspection had been completed.
“From our observations we found there were enough staff to assist people. Care staff did not seem rushed.” from the report
Kind, personal care
Staff understood people's preferences, backgrounds and emotional needs. Inspectors saw people being treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
“Care staff demonstrated a good understanding of people using the service.” from the report
Good care planning
Care records included detailed information about health, nutrition, risks, routines and personal choices. Staff used this information to support people.
“Care records were person centred, and provided specific information on how to support people.” from the report
Activities and choice
The home provided organised and one-to-one activities, and changed the programme in response to people's views.
“The service employed five activities coordinators who assisted in the delivery of both organised and ad hoc activities.” from the report
Some concerns about staffing
minorAlthough inspectors found staffing levels were sufficient, people gave mixed feedback. Some said staff were occasionally short, especially at weekends.
“Sometimes they're short of staff and they're very busy anyway” from the report
Earlier food hygiene problems
minorFood hygiene issues had been reported before the inspection. The report says a food safety action plan had been fully implemented by the time inspectors visited, but ongoing checks remain important.
“Prior to our inspection we were notified of some food hygiene issues within the kitchen at the service.” from the report
Redecoration planned
minorManagers acknowledged that parts of the building needed decoration improvements. Plans were due to begin soon, but the report does not confirm the work was completed.
“The registered manager and regional manager were also honest and clear about improvements they felt needed to be made to the decoration of the building.” from the report
- 01How do you check staffing levels at weekends and what happens if staff call in sick?
- 02What monitoring has continued since the food safety action plan was completed?
- 03Has the planned redecoration been completed, and which areas were included?
- 04How are activities matched to each person's interests, needs and ability to take part?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in reviewing their care plan?
This was a planned inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC questions and the care, accommodation and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 April 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.
What inspectors found, February 2017
Forrester Court was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found caring and responsive support, but staffing, care records and oversight needed improvement.
Inspectors visited on 12 and 15 December 2016. The first visit was unannounced. They spoke with people using the home, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care records, staff files and management records.
People were generally positive about the care. Inspectors found staff were kind, respected privacy and dignity, and understood people's personal histories. People had access to healthcare, suitable food and a programme of activities. Medicines were managed safely.
There were not enough staff scheduled on the first inspection day and before it. This meant some people waited about 25 minutes for their lunch. Some nutrition care records were inaccurate or lacked detail. The home's audits had not identified these problems.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe, effective and well-led were rated Requires Improvement. Caring and responsive were rated Good.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives gave positive feedback about staff. Inspectors saw staff speaking respectfully, learning about people's lives and supporting their choices.
“People using the service and relatives were satisfied with the level of care given by staff.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Medicines were stored, administered and checked safely. Records matched the medicines counted by inspectors.
“There were good systems in place for the safe management and administration of medicines.” from the report
Healthcare support
People were referred to relevant healthcare professionals, and staff followed advice from professionals such as dietitians and physiotherapists.
“People were supported effectively with their other healthcare needs and were supported to access a range of healthcare professionals.” from the report
Activities and involvement
People could join group or one-to-one activities. Their feedback was used to shape the activities programme.
“There was an activities programme which included both group and individual sessions and this included two sessions every weekday.” from the report
Staffing levels
seriousThere were not enough staff on duty on the first inspection day and before it. Some people had to wait around 25 minutes for their food, and staff were stretched across care and other duties.
“There were not enough staff scheduled to work on the first day of our inspection and prior to this.” from the report
Inaccurate nutrition records
seriousSome nutrition records contained mistakes, inconsistencies or too little detail. This could make it harder for staff to follow people's current dietary needs accurately.
“We found people's nutrition care records were lacking in detail and sometimes contained mistakes or inconsistencies.” from the report
Audits missed problems
seriousThe home's quality checks covered many areas, but they did not identify the staffing shortfall or problems in care records.
“However, internal auditing systems did not identify the issues found in relation to staffing or the inconsistencies found in care records during this inspection.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThe registered manager had left two weeks before the inspection. A replacement manager had only started on the first day of the visit.
“There was no registered manager at the service.” from the report
- 01What staffing levels are now provided on each unit, and how do you respond when people's needs increase?
- 02What action was taken after people had to wait about 25 minutes for their lunch?
- 03How do you check that nutrition care plans are accurate, complete and updated when people's needs change?
- 04Has a registered manager now been appointed, and how is the service being overseen during any transition?
- 05How do your audits now identify staffing shortfalls and errors in care records?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with visits on 12 and 15 December 2016; the report also says the previous person-centred care action had been completed. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 February 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 Forrester Court
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- April 2018Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 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 Westminster
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 £1,300 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“The quality of life that she's given my parents has been priceless. The peace of mind she's given my sisters and I, through a very difficult time, has been invaluable.”
“The interaction she gives my mother is incredible, singing, dancing, taking her to groups, on plenty of walks which mum always loves.”
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.