CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 10 Melbourne Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including testing, protective equipment, cleaning, visitors and safe admissions.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements and a clean, well-run home.
The inspection took place on 29 March 2021 and was announced. It was a targeted visit during the coronavirus pandemic, focused on infection prevention and control in the home.
Inspectors were assured that visitors, new or returning residents and staff were protected from infection. They found appropriate testing, self-isolation, social distancing and protective equipment arrangements.
The home was clean and hygienic. Staff had relevant infection control training, and the infection control policy was kept up to date. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Infection protection
The home had procedures for visitors, social distancing, testing and self-isolation. Staff monitored safety when people returned to the home.
“We were assured that the provider was preventing visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
Protective equipment and training
Protective equipment was available and staff were trained in infection control, testing and using protective equipment safely.
“Staff had received Infection Prevention Control (IPC), COVID-19 awareness and testing process, and donning and doffing training.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic, with regular deep cleaning and cleaning of frequently touched areas.
“The premises were clean and hygienic whilst still retaining a homely atmosphere.” from the report
Updated guidance
The infection control policy was reviewed regularly and coronavirus guidance for staff was updated when needed.
“The IPC policy was reviewed regularly. COVID-19 specific guidance for staff was updated as the need arose.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now?
- 02How often are people using the home and staff tested now?
- 03What happens if a resident or staff member tests positive?
- 04How are visitors currently allowed into the home, and what safety procedures must they follow?
- 05When was the home's latest full inspection, and what were the ratings for caring, effective, responsive and well-led care?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under Safe; the other quality areas were not assessed and no overall rating was given. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 April 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, September 2019
Inshore Support Limited - 10 Melbourne Road is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some management arrangements still developing.
This was an unannounced inspection on 31 July 2019. One inspector spoke with a person using the service, five staff members and three relatives. They also checked care plans, medicines records, recruitment files and management records.
The home supported three people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found enough staff, up-to-date risk assessments, safe medicines practice and staff who understood people's needs. People were supported to make choices, stay independent, take part in activities and keep relationships with relatives.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The manager was not yet registered with CQC, but was in the process of registering. End of life care documents had not yet been put into use, although nobody needed this care at the time.
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's preferences, life histories, communication methods and important relationships. Staff knew people well and used this information in daily support.
“People's needs, and preferences were met by staff who knew them well.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make everyday choices and develop practical skills. Staff encouraged people to do things for themselves where possible.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives” from the report
Safe care
Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, regular medicines audits and current risk assessments. Staff knew how to protect people from abuse and reduce risks.
“Care plans and risk assessments were up to date and contained information about people's current support needs” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to go out, follow their interests and spend time with relatives. Activities included community trips, meals out, music, painting and cinema visits.
“People were supported to follow their interests and take part in activities that were of interest to them.” from the report
Manager registration
needs fixingThe manager was not registered with CQC at the time of the inspection. The report says the registration process was under way.
“The manager was not yet registered with The Care Quality Commission (CQC) but was in the process of doing this.” from the report
End of life planning
needs fixingThe home had relevant documents but had not yet put them into use with people and their relatives. Nobody was receiving end of life care during the inspection.
“The director of care advised they had the relevant documentation but had not yet implemented it” from the report
Staff turnover
minorRelatives expressed concern about staff turnover, although they said it had not affected their loved ones and that relationships with regular staff were positive.
“Relatives expressed concern over staff turnover but said they did not think it had an impact on their loved ones.” from the report
- 01Has the manager now registered with CQC, and who is responsible for the home while registration is pending?
- 02How has staff turnover changed since the inspection, and how do you ensure people have familiar staff?
- 03Have end of life documents now been completed with each person and their relatives?
- 04How are medicines errors monitored, and what changes were made after the previous increase in errors?
- 05How will you support my relative to choose activities, stay independent and maintain family relationships?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 September 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 10 Melbourne Road
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 December 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Dudley
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 £1,230 a week. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
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.