CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Howards Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, July 2018
Howards Residential Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, responsive care, with some medicines and infection-control issues identified.
The inspection was unannounced and took place over two days. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines, training, recruitment, complaints and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe, staff knew them well, and relatives were welcomed and involved in care planning.
The home had enough staff, was clean, and supported people's medicines, nutrition, healthcare and activities. Inspectors found that 'when required' medicines did not have written protocols at the time, but the manager provided evidence after the inspection that these had been written with the GP. Inspectors also raised concerns about uncovered bins and toilet brushes.
Enough staff
Inspectors found there were enough staff and that people were not waiting too long for help.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind, personal care
Staff knew people well and used their histories and interests to have meaningful conversations.
“Without exception every interaction was caring, thoughtful and it showed that the staff knew people well.” from the report
Activities and choice
People could choose from activities, trips and quieter options. Their individual interests and abilities were considered.
“There is plenty for me to do if I choose” from the report
Good family involvement
Relatives were welcomed and could contribute to care planning and meetings about how the home operated.
“There was good communication with families who were made to feel welcome and contributed to care planning where people did not have the capacity to do so for themselves.” from the report
Support at the end of life
The home recorded people's wishes and worked with hospice nurses to support end-of-life care.
“There were systems in place to care for people at the end of their lives.” from the report
Missing medicines protocols
needs fixingAt the inspection, staff did not have written medical guidance for giving 'when required' medicines. The home later told inspectors that protocols had been written with the GP.
“There were no PRN protocols in place, which meant that there was no medical guidance for staff on how to give "when required" medicines appropriately.” from the report
Infection-control details
needs fixingThe home was clean overall, but inspectors saw bins without lids and toilet brushes without covers. The manager agreed to address this.
“However, we saw bins with no lids and toilet brushes with no covers, which is not good infection control practice.” from the report
Use of agency staff
minorRelatives' survey responses were positive apart from comments about agency staff. The manager said the same agency staff were being used to improve consistency.
“They were positive apart from comments relating to the use of agency staff.” from the report
- 01How are the new protocols for 'when required' medicines used and checked now?
- 02Have the bins been fitted with lids and the toilet brushes given covers?
- 03How many agency staff are currently used, and how do you keep care consistent?
- 04How will you involve my relative and our family in reviewing the care plan?
- 05What activities and trips would match my relative's interests and abilities?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the previous Good ratings were maintained. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 July 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 Howards Residential Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 November 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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.