CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Great Western Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and risks such as falls, mobility and skin integrity were assessed and reviewed. Medicines systems were effective, including support for people who were self-medicating.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, and the home worked with a multidisciplinary team. Meals and dietary needs were monitored, and people were involved in their assessments and goals.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and health professionals gave overwhelmingly positive feedback about staff kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions about their care and plans to return home.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and tailored to people's needs, preferences and independence goals. Activities such as crafts, baking, exercise and pet therapy supported wellbeing and reablement.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an established management and staff team, good links with health professionals and systems for reviewing quality. However, some staff competency and completed improvement checks were not consistently recorded.
What inspectors found, November 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised reablement care, with some records needing improvement.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 29 October 2018. One inspector observed the home, spoke with people, staff and a health professional, checked care records and staff files, and contacted other health professionals after the visit.
The home supported 14 people aged 65 and over to build confidence and independence before returning home. Inspectors found positive feedback about the care, respectful staff, personalised support, safe medicines arrangements and good teamwork with health professionals.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The Safe rating had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection in May 2016. The other four ratings remained Good.
Kind and respectful staff
People and health professionals spoke very positively about the caring approach. Staff knew people well and supported their independence while recognising when more help was needed.
“The response from people and feedback from health care professionals about the caring nature of staff was overwhelmingly positive.” from the report
Personalised reablement
Support was built around each person's goals, preferences and abilities. Staff and therapists worked together to help people improve their confidence and daily living skills.
“Staff and the multidisciplinary team worked together to enable people to progress in their well-being, skills and confidence.” from the report
Safe medicines support
People received medicines as prescribed. The home assessed and monitored people who were learning to manage their own medicines.
“Effective systems were in place to manage people's medicines or support and encourage people when self-medicating as part of their reablement plan.” from the report
Good involvement and choice
People were involved in care decisions and discharge planning. The home provided information and support to help people make choices and prepare to return home.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives.” from the report
Staff competency records
needs fixingObservations showing that staff met required care standards were not consistently recorded, particularly during induction and probation. The manager agreed to review the tools used for this.
“We identified the staff competencies observations were not consistently recorded to demonstrate that staff met the required standards of care” from the report
Emergency evacuation plans
minorThe home had plans to review how personal emergency evacuation plans were assessed, formatted and recorded. Ask how this review was completed and kept up to date.
“Plans were in place to review the assessment, format and recording of people's personal emergency evacuation plans.” from the report
Recording completed checks
needs fixingThe home carried out checks and acted on shortfalls, but did not always record that the work had been completed. The manager was also considering a new system for building and equipment checks.
“Any shortfalls or areas of concern found in the checks were acted on but not consistently recorded to show that the work had been completed.” from the report
- 01How are staff competency observations now recorded during induction and probation?
- 02How are personal emergency evacuation plans assessed, updated and recorded for each person?
- 03How do you record that building, equipment and other safety checks have been completed?
- 04How would you support my relative if their health deteriorated and they needed end of life care?
- 05How will you measure my relative's progress towards their reablement and independence goals?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 November 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 Great Western Court
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2014Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Gloucestershire
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 £1,030 to £1,360 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.