CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Goldenley Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including PPE, testing, visitors, admissions, hygiene and outbreak management. This was not a rated assessment of all aspects of safety.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection, although the report describes contact with families and activities during lockdown.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection, although the report describes updates and virtual meetings for relatives and support for staff.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Goldenley Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during a coronavirus outbreak.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 February 2021. Inspectors checked infection prevention and control because the home had experienced a coronavirus outbreak.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using personal protective equipment safely, supporting testing, following shielding and social distancing rules, and managing visitors and admissions safely.
The home supported people to keep in touch with family by video and telephone. It also provided activities during lockdown and support for staff wellbeing.
This inspection did not give an overall quality rating. The Safe question was recorded as inspected but not rated, and the other quality areas were not covered.
Contact with families
The home helped people maintain regular contact with friends and family through video and telephone calls. Relatives were kept updated through emails and virtual meetings.
“People were supported to maintain regular contact with friends and family through video and telephone calls.” from the report
Activities during lockdown
Activities were adapted so people could remain engaged during lockdown. People isolating in their rooms received regular one-to-one activities.
“People who were isolating in their bedrooms were supported with regular activities on a 1:1 basis.” from the report
Infection control facilities
The home created an infection prevention and control area with testing equipment, protective equipment and handwashing facilities.
“The room contained COVID-19 testing equipment, personal protective equipment (PPE) and handwashing and sanitising facilities.” from the report
Staff wellbeing
The provider gave staff information about looking after themselves and encouraged meetings where they could discuss their feelings and support each other.
“Staff were encouraged to join regular meetings to talk about how they were feeling, share memories and support one another.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently preventing and managing infection outbreaks?
- 02How will my relative keep in regular contact with family if visits are restricted?
- 03What activities are available for people who need to isolate in their bedrooms?
- 04How do you support staff wellbeing after the recent outbreak?
- 05What are the home's current arrangements for testing, PPE and handwashing?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care questions were not covered. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 March 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, April 2019
Goldenley Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some areas needing redecoration.
This was an unannounced inspection on 19 February 2019. Two inspectors spoke with people, a relative and staff. They observed care, looked around the home, checked care plans, staff files, training records and medicines records, and reviewed other records.
Inspectors found that people were safe and received their medicines correctly. Staff were trained and understood their roles. Care plans were detailed and up to date. People were treated with dignity, offered choices and supported to stay active and connected with family and friends.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The report says the home met the characteristics of good in all areas. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published in March 2016.
Kind and respectful care
Staff were described as knowledgeable and genuinely caring. Inspectors found that people were treated with dignity and respect.
“People received care from well trained, knowledgeable staff who genuinely cared about the people living at the service and treated people with dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's histories, likes and dislikes. Staff used this information to support choice, independence and meaningful activities.
“Care was personalised to meet people's needs and promote choice and independence.” from the report
Safe medicines
Inspectors checked ten medicines records and found medicines were ordered, stored, given and recorded correctly. Staff had training and regular checks of their competence.
“Medicines were correctly ordered, stored, administered, recorded and disposed of.” from the report
Good management oversight
The home used regular audits, daily meetings and feedback from people, relatives and staff to monitor care and make improvements.
“The service had in place effective quality monitoring arrangements.” from the report
Some areas looked tired
minorInspectors noted that some parts of the building needed redecoration. Plans were in place, but the work had not been completed at the inspection.
“There were plans in place to carry out some redecoration as some areas were looking a bit tired.” from the report
Access to the garden
minorPeople said they had not been able to use the garden as much as they wanted. The home said it would plan regular garden activities.
“People identified they had not been able to access to garden as much they would wish.” from the report
End of life care training still in progress
minorThe home was working towards completing the recognised gold standard framework for end of life care. It was not yet complete at the time of the inspection.
“The service was working towards completing the gold standard framework.” from the report
- 01What redecoration has been completed since inspectors said some areas looked tired?
- 02How often can residents use the garden, and how are their individual wishes supported?
- 03Has the home completed the gold standard framework for end of life care?
- 04How are medicines fridge checks and medicines audits followed up when a problem is found?
- 05How will you find out and record my relative's history, preferences, communication needs and daily choices?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the report says the home remained Good in each area. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 April 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 Goldenley Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.