CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Foxley Lane
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. The home had improved its cleanliness, equipment checks, risk management and medicines systems, although one person's prescribed patch was not routinely recorded by location.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported communication, offered choices and encouraged people to do as much as they could for themselves.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had stronger leadership, monitoring and communication with relatives. Inspectors found no evidence that the plan for the manager to oversee two services was putting people at risk, but said they would check this again.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Foxley Lane rated Good; inspectors found safer, kinder care after major improvements, with some management and medicines points to watch.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 18 April 2023. Inspectors observed care, spoke with four relatives and staff, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Caring and Well-led. Inspectors found a cleaner and better-maintained environment, safer medicines systems, enough staff at the inspection, and respectful support that promoted choice, communication and independence.
The home had improved from Requires improvement at the previous inspection in May 2022. The earlier breaches had been put right and the home was no longer in breach of regulations. However, inspectors noted that a prescribed patch was not always recorded properly, agency staff were still being used, and there were concerns about the manager overseeing two services.
Cleaner and safer environment
The home had replaced furniture and equipment that created hygiene risks and had improved safety checks. Relatives also described a clear improvement in cleanliness.
“It's so much cleaner and nicer there. I can't believe how clean it is. Especially [family member's] bedroom. It's amazing.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff used positive language, gave people time to respond and supported their preferred ways of communicating. People were seen to be calm and comfortable with staff.
“People now received kinder, more compassionate care from staff who used positive, respectful language which people understood and responded well to.” from the report
Improved leadership
The new home manager was accessible and used checks to monitor safety and care quality. Relatives and staff said communication and the atmosphere had improved.
“A great improvement is the management and family meetings that are now taking place.” from the report
Staffing met people's needs
There were enough staff at the inspection, including for one-to-one support, activities and visits. Staff skills and numbers matched people's needs at that time.
“The service had enough staff at the time of this inspection, including for one-to-one support, for people to take part in activities and visits how and when they wanted.” from the report
Patch medicine records
needs fixingFor one person, staff did not routinely record where a prescribed patch had been applied. The manager said a body map would be introduced immediately after the inspection.
“We did note for one person, staff did not routinely record where a prescribed patch had been administered which might increase the risk of this being applied in the wrong area.” from the report
Use of agency staff
minorThe home still used agency staff for shifts that permanent staff could not fill. It was recruiting permanent staff and trying to use the same agency workers for consistency.
“The service was using agency staff to work shifts that could not be filled with permanent staff.” from the report
Manager covering two services
needs fixingRelatives and staff were concerned that the manager would not be at the home full time if responsible for two services. Inspectors found no evidence of risk at this inspection but planned to review the arrangement.
“Although we found no evidence at this inspection that the provider's plans put people at risk, we will look at this again at our next inspection to check this arrangement was not having a negative impact on the safety and quality of support provided to people.” from the report
- 01How do you now record the exact location of prescribed patches, and when was the body map system introduced?
- 02How many agency staff are currently used, and what is the plan for recruiting permanent staff?
- 03How often is the home manager physically present if they are responsible for two services?
- 04What improvements have been made to activities and stimulation since the inspection?
- 05How will you make sure the cleanliness, medicines checks and care standards found at this inspection are maintained?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Caring and Well-led only; Effective and Responsive were not inspected and their ratings carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 May 2023 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, May 2022
Foxley Lane was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found risks with safety, dignity and management, although care planning and staff training were good.
This was an unannounced inspection on 6 April 2022. Two inspectors visited the home, observed care, reviewed records and spoke with staff, relatives and professionals. The home supported 7 people and had places for 8.
Inspectors found problems with infection control, food hygiene, a window safety risk and medicine records. They also saw that people were not always spoken to respectfully or engaged with. Staff changes had affected consistency, and management checks had not identified or fixed several issues.
The home was rated Good for Effective. Safe, Caring and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection in 2019. The provider made some immediate changes and had an improvement plan, but more work was still needed.
Personalised care plans
People had detailed care plans covering their health, communication needs, strengths and aspirations. Relatives and staff were involved in reviewing them.
“People had care and support plans that were personalised, holistic, strengths-based and reflected their needs and aspirations, included physical and mental health needs.” from the report
Staff training
Staff had training relevant to supporting people with learning disabilities, autism, communication needs, positive behaviour and human rights.
“People were supported by staff who had received relevant training in evidence-based practice.” from the report
Choice and independence
People could make choices, personalise their rooms and receive support in ways that matched their communication needs and preferences.
“People were enabled to make choices for themselves and staff ensured they had the information they needed.” from the report
Health support
People were supported to attend health checks and appointments. The home worked with health and social care professionals and kept relatives informed.
“People were supported to attend annual health checks, screenings and primary care services.” from the report
Infection and hygiene risks
seriousPeople were not always supported to wash or sanitise their hands before meals. Some furniture and fittings were in poor condition, and food was not labelled correctly.
“People were not supported to wash or sanitise their hands prior to eating meals.” from the report
Medicine records
seriousMedicine stock records did not match the medicines present. Information about some as-needed medicines was not immediately available to staff.
“Records completed by staff of stock checks did not match the quantities of medicines we saw at inspection.” from the report
Dignity and respect
seriousInspectors saw staff use language that was not respectful and sometimes fail to explain what they were doing or engage with people.
“The provider had not made sure that people were treated by staff with dignity and respect at all times.” from the report
Staff changes and consistency
needs fixingA high turnover of staff meant some newer staff did not know people as well as they should. This affected consistency and people's quality of life.
“New staff had not been given enough support to develop their knowledge and understanding of people and their needs so did not know people as well as they could.” from the report
Reviewing people's goals
needs fixingKey worker meetings had not been held consistently. This meant the home did not have fully up-to-date information about people's progress towards their goals and aspirations.
“Staff had not consistently held 'key worker' meetings with people so there was a lack of up to date information about people's progress in meeting their goals and aspirations.” from the report
- 01What evidence can you show that the infection control and food hygiene problems found in April 2022 have been fixed?
- 02How do you now check that medicine stock records are accurate and that information about as-needed medicines is immediately available?
- 03What training and supervision have newer staff received to help them communicate respectfully and engage with people?
- 04How do you make sure key worker meetings happen regularly and that each person's progress towards their goals is reviewed?
- 05What extra management checks and support are now in place following the breaches in safe care, dignity and governance?
This began as a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led, but was widened to include Caring; Responsive was not inspected and its rating was not given. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 May 2022 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 Foxley Lane
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2022Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 October 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 Croydon
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. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.