CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Greenbanks Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks were assessed and reviewed, staffing levels were considered sufficient, medicines were managed safely and infection control arrangements were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training and supervision, and care plans covered people's needs and preferences. People were supported with food, drinks, health care and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw staff respecting privacy and dignity, offering choices and encouraging independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and activities were based on people's interests. The home supported family contact, communication needs and end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff said the home was well managed and had a positive culture. Quality checks were carried out, but there were no formal feedback methods for residents.
What inspectors found, November 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no breaches identified.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 3 November 2021. One inspector and an Expert by Experience spoke with six people, six relatives and six staff. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and good infection control arrangements.
People were treated kindly and with dignity. Staff supported people's choices, health, nutrition, relationships and activities. Care was personalised, including for people living with dementia and people receiving end of life care.
The home had a positive culture and systems to check quality and learn from incidents. However, it did not have formal ways for people living in the home to give feedback, although staff asked for views verbally.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. They also found safe recruitment checks and no need for agency staff at the time.
“There were enough staff suitably deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke highly of the staff. Inspectors saw people being treated with dignity, offered choices and supported to remain independent.
“People were supported by kind and caring staff.” from the report
Personalised activities
The home offered daily activities, outings and events. Staff adapted activities to people's interests, experiences and dementia-related needs.
“The provider, registered manager and staff worked together to ensure there was a full programme of activities for people.” from the report
Good end of life support
People's wishes were recorded and staff had relevant training. Inspectors found that people receiving end of life care were kept comfortable and treated with dignity.
“People were made comfortable at the end of their life.” from the report
Quality checks
Management used audits, incident reviews and outside advice to monitor and improve the service.
“Quality was monitored through a variety of monthly audits completed by the registered manager.” from the report
No formal resident feedback system
minorThe home had not set up formal ways for residents to give feedback. Inspectors noted that views were gathered verbally instead, and people and relatives felt able to raise issues directly.
“The provider and registered manager had not set up formal methods of obtaining feedback from people living at the service although they sought feedback verbally.” from the report
- 01How can residents give formal feedback now, and how will you show that their views lead to changes?
- 02How do you review staffing levels if people's care needs increase?
- 03How are activities adapted for people living with dementia and for people with communication difficulties?
- 04How will you record and follow a person's wishes if they become increasingly unwell or need end of life care?
- 05How are medicines checked when they are prescribed to be taken when required?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 November 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 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with a three-star food hygiene rating and some outstanding kitchen actions.
This was an unannounced inspection on 20 May 2019. One inspector and an expert by experience reviewed care records, medicines, staff files, audits and safety checks. They spoke with people, relatives, staff, the provider and a visiting GP, and observed care.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and enjoyed living there. Inspectors saw kind and respectful interactions, and found staff knew people well and supported their choices, health, medicines, nutrition and independence.
Staffing was adjusted when people's needs changed. Recruitment checks, risk management, medicines systems, safeguarding training and cleaning arrangements were in place. The home had systems to monitor quality and act on problems. The kitchen had received three out of five stars in August 2018, with an action plan for outstanding work.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives praised the staff, and inspectors observed kind interactions. Staff knew people's histories, wishes and preferred names.
“People spoke highly of the staff, we observed kind natured interactions between people and staff.” from the report
Safe staffing and care
People said staff were available when needed. Staffing levels were increased when a person's needs changed, and recruitment checks were completed.
“There were enough trained staff with the right skills to meet people's needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's likes, dislikes, histories and hobbies. People were involved in decisions and encouraged to remain independent.
“People were at the centre of their care and support, making choices about their lives.” from the report
Good management checks
The management team used regular audits, meetings and feedback to monitor care and make improvements. Staff said managers were approachable and supportive.
“Systems were in place to monitor and audit the quality of care people received.” from the report
Kitchen actions
minorThe kitchen had a three-star food hygiene rating in August 2018. The provider had an action plan for outstanding work, including replacing cracked tiles and worktops.
“The kitchen was awarded three out of five stars from the Food Standards Hygiene Rating in August 2018.” from the report
- 01Has the action plan following the kitchen's three-star food hygiene rating been completed?
- 02Have the cracked tiles and worktops in the kitchen been replaced?
- 03Has the garden renovation been completed so that all areas are fully accessible?
- 04What daily activities are currently available for people to choose from?
- 05How will staffing levels be reviewed if my relative's needs change?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering the care provided and the premises, with ratings given for all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 June 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 Greenbanks Care Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2019GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 May 2018.
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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 £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.