CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Jubilee Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- People were supported safely in most cases, but eating positions, falls risk management and some pressure-relieving mattress settings were not always right. Medicines records and quantities were correct, and infection control was mostly in place, although some staff wore masks incorrectly.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its rating was carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. The report says people generally described staff as kind and care as person-centred, but some choices and support after falls needed review.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. The report says people's needs were generally met, but the home was reviewing bedding choices and meaningful activity for people cared for in bed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team had action plans, carried out checks and responded openly to feedback. People, relatives, staff and health professionals were positive about the new management team.
What inspectors found, December 2022
Jubilee Court rated Good overall; inspectors found kind care and good leadership, but safety required improvement.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 18 October 2022. Inspectors reviewed Safe and Well-led, spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, and checked care, medicines, incident and management records.
The overall rating was Good. Safe was rated Requires Improvement because people were not always positioned safely when eating, falls risks were not always managed consistently, and some pressure-relieving mattresses were set incorrectly. Some staff also did not wear face masks correctly.
Medicines were managed safely, staff were generally available, and people said they felt safe and were treated kindly. Well-led was rated Good. The management team understood many areas needing improvement and acted on the inspectors' feedback during and after the inspection.
The home had not been rated at the previous inspection, published in February 2022. The overall rating used the current findings for Safe and Well-led and carried forward the other ratings from the last comprehensive inspection.
Medicines were accurate
Inspectors checked a sample of medicines and found the quantities matched the records. Plans were in place for medicines given only when needed.
“We found they were correct and tallied with the records held.” from the report
Kind and approachable staff
People and relatives described staff as friendly and kind. Call bells were answered promptly during the inspection.
“People told us that their needs were met, and staff were nice. They told us they felt safe.” from the report
Knowledgeable management
The registered manager knew people and the home well, used audits and worked with health professionals to improve care.
“We found the registered manager to be extremely knowledgeable about people living at the service, relationships they had and in general about the home.” from the report
Action taken after feedback
The management team acted on the inspectors' feedback by reassessing needs, providing training and supervision, and carrying out further checks.
“Following our feedback, the registered manager took action which included reassessing people's needs, training, carrying out supervisions with staff and undertaking audits.” from the report
Unsafe positioning during meals
seriousTwo people were being helped to eat while lying down, despite their assessments saying how they should be positioned. Staff were challenged about this during the inspection.
“We observed two people who were being assisted to eat while laying down even though risk assessments for when supporting people with eating did detail safe positioning.” from the report
Pressure-relieving equipment needed better checks
needs fixingSome mattresses were not set correctly for the person using them. Inspectors recommended more robust checks because this could increase the risk of a pressure ulcer or discomfort.
“We recommend the management team ensure the checks were more robust to ensure the equipment was effective and did not increase the risk of a pressure ulcer or discomfort.” from the report
Some staff wore masks incorrectly
needs fixingInspectors saw some staff who were not wearing face masks properly. This was raised in team meetings and with the staff concerned.
“However, we saw some staff during our visit that were not wearing face masks properly.” from the report
People could be left without supervision
needs fixingWhen staff supported people in bed, others in communal areas were sometimes left without supervision. People cared for in bed were also at risk of social isolation.
“This meant when staff were supporting these people, others were left without supervision in communal areas.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure people are positioned safely when eating, and how do you check this in practice?
- 02What is the current process after a fall, especially when someone takes blood-thinning medicines?
- 03How do you check that pressure-relieving mattresses are set correctly for each person?
- 04What staffing changes have been made at busy times, and how do you prevent people in communal areas being left without supervision?
- 05How do you monitor correct mask wearing and show that the improvements identified after this inspection have continued?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried forward from the last comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 December 2022 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, February 2022
Jubilee Court was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 arrangements but some infection-control and cleaning weaknesses.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 26 January 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures were affecting the home.
Inspectors were assured about visiting, shielding, admissions, testing, outbreaks and the safe use of personal protective equipment. Staff checked people's temperatures and the home supported essential caregiver visits.
There were some shortfalls. Staff did not follow good infection-control practice when disposing of a used catheter and used gloves. Some areas were damaged, cleaning records lacked detail, and there were no records showing that frequently touched areas had been cleaned.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection does not give an overall quality rating or a full set of ratings for the five questions.
Visiting arrangements
The home had supervised visiting processes and allowed essential caregiver visits. Other ways to keep in contact were available for relatives who could not enter.
“There were safe visiting processes which were overseen by staff when visitors entered the home.” from the report
COVID-19 precautions
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, arranged testing and managed shielding and social distancing.
“Staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) correctly. The registered manager had ensured this was made available throughout the home.” from the report
Vaccination checks
The home checked vaccination passes or exemptions for visiting professionals and checked staff vaccination status.
“The service was meeting the requirement to ensure non-exempt staff and visiting professionals were vaccinated against COVID-19.” from the report
Cleaning records
needs fixingDaily cleaning records did not clearly show what had been cleaned. There were also no records for cleaning frequently touched areas.
“The records of daily cleaning completed by staff lacked detail as to what they had cleaned.” from the report
Damaged areas
needs fixingDamage in hallways, kitchenettes and en-suites made it harder to keep these areas clean and free from infection.
“Some areas of the environment (hallways, kitchenettes and en-suites) were damaged, which made it difficult to keep these areas clean and free form infection.” from the report
Clinical waste disposal
seriousStaff did not follow good infection-control practice when disposing of a used catheter and used gloves for one person.
“We found staff had not followed good infection control practices when discarding of a used catheter and used gloves for one person.” from the report
Infection-control audits
needs fixingRegular and effective infection-control audits were not being completed. Risk assessments for people who were clinically vulnerable did not always fully explore the risks.
“The registered manager was not completing regular and effective, infection protection control audits.” from the report
- 01Have the damaged hallways, kitchenettes and en-suites been repaired, and how do you check that they can now be cleaned properly?
- 02How do staff record cleaning of frequently touched areas, and can we see recent records?
- 03What has changed in the way used catheters and gloves are disposed of?
- 04How often are infection-control audits completed, and what did the most recent audit find?
- 05How are infection-control risks for clinically vulnerable people assessed and reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other questions were not assessed in detail. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 February 2022 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 Jubilee Court
5 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- June 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 July 2012.
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.