CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Insight Teynham
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, December 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring support, but communication with relatives was sometimes poor.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 17 October 2017. They spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and checked care records, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home supported up to 13 people with learning disabilities and additional challenging behaviours. Inspectors found 12 people living there. They found suitable staffing, trained staff, personalised care plans, safe medicines systems and good access to health professionals.
People were treated with kindness and supported to make choices, build independence and take part in activities they enjoyed. The home had systems for complaints, quality checks and staff support.
The home remained rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means inspectors found it met the relevant standards at the time of this inspection, although they identified a communication issue for the provider to review.
Personalised risk support
Risk assessments were tailored to each person and updated when their needs changed. The home supported people to take reasonable risks while reducing hazards.
“People had risk assessments that were personalised to their needs and these were reviewed on a regular basis and adjusted if a person's needs had changed.” from the report
Kind and familiar staff
Inspectors saw staff spending time with people, offering reassurance and using their knowledge of people's interests to support them.
“Staff were seen to be kind and caring towards the people they supported.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were encouraged to take part in cooking and housework, work towards personal goals and choose activities that suited them.
“People could choose what activities they participated in and these were personalised to their needs.” from the report
Quality monitoring
Managers used audits, surveys and meetings to look for problems. Records showed action was taken, including repairs and checks on medicines.
“There were processes in place to check the quality of the service and identify any shortfalls.” from the report
Communication with relatives
needs fixingOne person said they were not always told information they should receive about care reviews. Inspectors recommended that the provider review its communication systems.
“I am invited to the reviews of the care but the communication is sometimes poor and I do not get told things that I should get told.” from the report
Mixed views about activities
minorA survey found that seven of ten people were unhappy with the activities on offer. However, everyone at a later meeting said they were happy with the activities they chose.
“It was recorded in the survey that seven out of ten people were not happy with the activities on offer.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure relatives are told promptly about care reviews and important changes?
- 02What has changed in response to the finding that seven out of ten people were unhappy with the activities on offer?
- 03How are each person's risk assessments reviewed when their needs or behaviour changes?
- 04How do you check that staff understand each person's communication needs and preferred way of receiving support?
- 05How are relatives involved in reviewing care plans and raising concerns?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall quality of the home and all five CQC questions, with the previous all-Good rating from 2015 being reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 December 2017 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 Insight Teynham
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2017Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 March 2013.
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.