CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Fountain Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, premises hygiene and the infection control policy. They were only somewhat assured that outbreaks could be prevented or managed because individual risk assessments were not formally completed for people and staff with increased vulnerabilities, including staff who declined vaccination.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Fountain Court was inspected but not rated; infection control was mostly reassuring, but individual COVID-19 risk assessments were not fully in place.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 18 March 2021. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control because of the COVID-19 pandemic. They did not give an overall rating.
Inspectors found that visitors could use a separate visiting room, staff followed personal protective equipment and distancing guidance, and infection control was discussed at daily handovers.
The home was rated “Inspected but not rated” for safety. Inspectors were assured about most infection control arrangements, but only somewhat assured that infection outbreaks could be effectively prevented or managed.
Safer visiting arrangements
Visitors used a separate room outside the home. This allowed testing and visits without visitors entering the home, which reduced infection risks.
“There was a designated room for visits which was located in a unit outside of the home.” from the report
Staff followed precautions
Inspectors observed staff following protective equipment and social distancing guidance.
“Our observations during the inspection confirmed staff were adhering to Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and social distancing guidance.” from the report
Infection control was discussed regularly
Daily staff handovers included infection prevention and control updates, including cleaning guidance.
“Infection prevention and control procedures were routinely discussed during daily staff handover to provide updates and reinforce the importance of adhering to good practice guidelines in areas such as cleaning.” from the report
Most arrangements were reassuring
Inspectors were assured about testing, protective equipment, admissions, social distancing, premises hygiene and the infection control policy.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Individual COVID-19 risk assessments
needs fixingThere was no formal process to assess and reduce COVID-19 risks for individuals who might be more vulnerable. Staff who declined vaccination also did not have formal risk assessments to reduce related risks.
“There was no formal process in place to assess and reduce the risk of COVID-19 for individual people and staff which considered characteristics or vulnerabilities that may put them at increased risk.” from the report
Risks linked to vaccination decisions
needs fixingFormal risk assessments had not been completed for staff who declined the COVID-19 vaccination. Inspectors signposted the provider to resources to improve its approach.
“Formal risk assessments were not completed for staff declining the COVID-19 vaccination to mitigate risks.” from the report
- 01How do you now formally assess COVID-19 risks for people and staff who may have increased vulnerabilities?
- 02How are risks assessed and reduced when a member of staff declines COVID-19 vaccination?
- 03How do you test visitors and manage visits now?
- 04What is the current process if there is a suspected or confirmed infection outbreak?
- 05How do daily handovers check that cleaning and other infection control procedures are being followed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 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, June 2018
Fountain Court is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, and earlier medicine-record problems had been addressed.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 2 May 2018. Two inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicine records, staff files and quality checks.
The inspectors found that people were safe and supported by staff who understood their needs. Medicines were managed properly, risks were assessed, and people received suitable food and healthcare. Staff were kind, respected people's choices and helped them remain independent.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found the service met the expected standard overall. The overall rating remained Good, as it was at the previous inspection in November 2015.
Medicine safety
The earlier concerns about medicine disposal records and guidance for medicines given when needed had been addressed. Inspectors found medicines were obtained, stored, given and disposed of safely.
“We found systems were in place to consistently and safely manage people's medicines.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff supported people with warmth and patience. They respected refusals, offered choices and encouraged people to do things for themselves where possible.
“We saw people were comfortable with staff and interactions between staff and people were friendly.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's needs, preferences, cultural requirements and interests. Staff used this information when providing support.
“We reviewed people's assessments and care plans. They detailed people's individual needs and contained information on people's requirements, likes, dislikes and preferences.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider used audits, accident reviews, meetings and surveys to check the service and learn from events. Inspectors saw that identified issues were addressed.
“We saw there were systems for monitoring the quality and safety of the service in place and these demonstrated the provider had systems in place to learn and develop the service.” from the report
Some gaps in records
minorInspectors found some limited gaps in records, although the manager and staff could explain how people were kept safe. Ask to see how record keeping is checked and improved.
“We found some limited gaps in records although the manager and staff were able to explain how they kept people safe, this confirmed by relatives we spoke with.” from the report
Time for staff to spend with people
minorA staff member said they would like more time to sit with people. They did not say staffing levels were unsafe, but this is worth discussing if companionship is important to your relative.
“I don't get as much time as I would like to sit and spend time with people. We can give them quality of time but not quantity” from the report
Website rating display
minorAt the time of inspection, the rating was not displayed clearly on the provider's website. The provider corrected this after inspectors raised it.
“While people had access to the provider's CQC rating for Fountain Court on the premises this information was not displayed on what may be constituted to be the provider's website.” from the report
- 01How do you now check medicine disposal records and medicines given when needed, following the problems found at the 2015 inspection?
- 02How do you check for and correct gaps in care records?
- 03How many staff are available at different times, and how do you make sure staff have enough time to sit and spend time with residents?
- 04How do you make sure activities remain meaningful and suited to my relative if there is no formal activities programme?
- 05How will you involve me and my relative in care choices, including decisions about health or end-of-life care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 June 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 Fountain Court
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 December 2010.
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 Sandwell
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 £1,190 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“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.