CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 38 South Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, enough staff, robust recruitment checks, safe medicines arrangements and effective infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care records were personalised. Staff received induction, training and supervision, and people were supported with meals, healthcare and legal decision-making processes.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff knew people well and supported them patiently and respectfully. Inspectors saw people being treated with privacy and dignity and encouraged to do things for themselves.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was individualised and reflected people's communication needs, interests and goals. People could join activities, work, attend groups and use an easy-read complaints process.
- Well-led?
- Good
- There was an acting manager supported by the registered manager and regional manager. Audits, meetings, surveys and action plans were used to monitor the service and make improvements.
What inspectors found, December 2018
HF Trust - 38 South Road was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with some further work needed on end-of-life planning.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 8 November 2018. One inspector met all 10 people living there, spoke with three people, staff and managers, and checked care records, medicines, staff files and other records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, safe medicines arrangements, clean premises and appropriate safeguarding and risk management.
People were supported to make choices, stay independent and take part in community activities. Staff knew people well, treated them with dignity and helped them access healthcare, work, activities and meals they chose.
The home had been rated Good at the previous inspection and remained Good. Inspectors said there was no evidence of serious risks or concerns. They noted that more work was needed on end-of-life care discussions and staff training.
Promoting independence
People were supported to make choices and do as much as possible for themselves, including travelling independently and taking part in daily household tasks.
“Staff promoted people's independence. We observed staff interacting with people and encouraging them to do what they could for themselves, with assistance if required.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
Inspectors saw positive relationships between staff and residents. Staff were patient, knew people well and respected their privacy and dignity.
“We observed people being treated with privacy, dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised care
Care records included detailed guidance about people's needs, routines and goals. Communication was adapted with pictorial information where needed.
“Care and support was individualised and person centred.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff with the right skills and saw evidence of safe recruitment and medicines management.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff with the correct skills mix on duty to provide care and support for people's assessed needs.” from the report
Choice and community life
People chose meals and activities and were supported to attend groups, day services and jobs.
“People were encouraged to follow their interests.” from the report
End-of-life planning
minorThe manager recognised that more work was needed to discuss people's end-of-life wishes and had arranged staff training. Families should ask what progress has been made.
“The acting manager was aware they needed to do more work on this and had arranged training for staff to help with this difficult subject.” from the report
Original building design
minorThe report says the home was not originally designed around best-practice principles about choice, independence and inclusion. Inspectors also said people were nevertheless supported to live ordinary lives and take part in the community.
“The care service had not originally been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance.” from the report
- 01What progress has been made with recording people's end-of-life wishes and training staff since the inspection?
- 02How do you make sure people can take reasonable risks while remaining safe and independent?
- 03How are people supported if they manage some or all of their own medicines?
- 04How are complaints and informal concerns, including entries in the 'grumbles book', followed up now?
- 05How are people involved in decisions about activities, meals, redecorating and their personal care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with the overall Good rating remaining unchanged from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 December 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 38 South Road
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Hertfordshire
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 £1,300 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.