CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Highbury Gardens
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed, staff understood safeguarding, there were enough staff, and medicines were administered safely. They recommended adding more detail to two medicine risk assessments.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff received induction, training, supervision and guidance. People's health, nutrition, choices and legal rights were assessed and supported.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were patient, kind and respectful. People were supported with privacy, dignity, consent and independence, and were involved in their care plans.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported to take part in activities they enjoyed, although the home needed to improve its understanding and use of the Accessible Information Standard.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive culture, supportive management and regular quality checks. The manager had identified and acted on earlier medicine recording problems and other shortfalls.
What inspectors found, January 2019
Highbury Gardens was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements needed in communication guidance and some medicine risk records.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 12 December 2018. It was the first inspection since the home registered with the CQC in March 2016. Inspectors observed care, spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers, and checked care, medicine, training, accident and quality records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable training, safe medicine administration, personalised care and support for people's independence, health, choices and activities.
There were some areas to improve. Two medicine risk assessments did not contain enough detail about possible side effects and overdoses. Staff were not fully aware of the Accessible Information Standard, and a relative said communication techniques for a person with autism could be improved. Electrical remedial work had also been recommended, and the manager said an engineer had been booked.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff supporting people patiently and attentively. People’s privacy, dignity and confidentiality were respected.
“We saw that staff supported people patiently and were attentive to their needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people’s preferences, communication needs, routines and goals. Staff knew people well and supported their choices.
“Care plans were person centred and contained information about people's preferences.” from the report
Support for independence
People were encouraged to do as much as possible for themselves and to make choices about their daily lives.
“People were supported to remain as independent as possible.” from the report
Activities and community life
People took part in activities suited to their interests, including swimming, walking, college, horse riding and cinema trips.
“Each person took part in activities of their choice.” from the report
Regular quality checks
The manager checked the home weekly, and the provider carried out further audits. Earlier medicine recording problems had been identified and addressed.
“Audits and quality assurance checks took place weekly and the provider undertook periodic inspections of the home.” from the report
Medicine risk details
needs fixingTwo people’s medicine risk assessments had blank sections where further guidance about side effects and overdoses should have been recorded. Inspectors recommended that these details be completed.
“However, these risk assessments contained a comments section to fill in for further details and guidance where there was a known risk. The section was left blank on two people's records.” from the report
Communication guidance
needs fixingStaff were not fully aware of the Accessible Information Standard. A relative also felt that staff did not always use the right words or techniques to help a person with autism understand and make choices.
“However, the registered manager and staff were not fully aware of the AIS, although communication strategies for people were in place.” from the report
Electrical remedial work
needs fixingA professional report recommended further work on the electrical installations. The manager said an engineer had been booked to complete the repairs after the inspection.
“an electrical installation safety report from a professional contractor recommended that further remedial works on the electrical installations were made.” from the report
- 01Have all medicine risk assessments now been completed with clear guidance about side effects and overdoses?
- 02How are staff trained and checked to make sure they use the right communication techniques for people with autism and learning disabilities?
- 03Were the recommended electrical repairs completed, and when was the work signed off as safe?
- 04How are medicine records checked now, following the earlier problems with missing signatures and tally counts?
- 05How will the home involve my relative and our family in reviewing their care plan and communication needs?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 January 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 Highbury Gardens
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- January 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 March 2016.
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 Redbridge
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 £1,250 a week. 75 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Sidonia is a first class live-in carer whose dedication and thoughtfulness made her stay a happy experience.”
“Charity would take Nan on holidays day trips and shopping adventures”
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.