CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Keevan Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People received their medicines safely and on time. Risks, staffing, infection control, recruitment and safety checks were also found to be well managed.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, including in autism, learning disabilities, positive behaviour support and epilepsy. People were supported with food, healthcare appointments, their living environment and decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors observed kind and caring interactions. People were involved in their care, supported to maintain their independence and helped to follow their cultural and religious needs.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported with communication, relationships, activities and interests, and were given information about how to complain.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a positive, person-centred culture and systems to monitor care quality. Audits, feedback, incidents and staff discussions were used to identify and act on learning.
What inspectors found, July 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
The home provides personal care for three people with learning disabilities and mental health conditions. The inspection was unannounced and took place on 30 March and 11 May 2022.
The inspector spoke with people, staff, the manager and a relative. They observed care and reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines, staff records, accidents, fire safety and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were supported to make choices, stay independent, follow their interests and receive care that was suited to them.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement, with concerns about medicines and management oversight. Inspectors found these issues had been improved and the home was no longer in breach of the relevant regulations.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make decisions, develop daily living skills and take part in activities. Their care was planned around what mattered to them.
“People were supported to maintain their independence and lead full lives.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw patient and reassuring support. People appeared comfortable with staff and had good relationships with them.
“We observed kind and caring interactions between people and staff.” from the report
Medicines improved
The previous medicines concerns had been addressed. Stock checks, storage and administration arrangements were found to be effective.
“At this inspection there were robust medicine stock controls in place that were checked daily.” from the report
Personalised communication
Staff understood how people communicated and provided information in accessible formats, including pictorial care plans and easy read language.
“People had pictorial care plans written in easy read language and large font.” from the report
Activities and community life
People were supported to follow their interests and take part in indoor and outdoor activities, including going shopping and to a local coffee shop.
“People were fully supported to follow their interests and have a full life.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you make sure the improvements in medicines management continue?
- 02When will the planned electronic medicines records and oversight system be introduced?
- 03How will my relative be involved in reviewing their care plan and positive behaviour support plan?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative?
- 05How would you support my relative's cultural, religious and communication needs?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including care, records, medicines, staffing, infection control and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 July 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, August 2021
Keevan Lodge remained Requires Improvement overall; a targeted inspection found better medicine and infection controls, but the service was not fully rated.
Inspectors made an unannounced, targeted visit on 11 June 2021. They checked whether the home had acted on a warning notice about safe care and treatment, focusing on medicines and infection prevention and control.
They found enough improvement for the home to no longer be in breach of Regulation 12 for the issues checked. Medicines were generally given safely and as prescribed. COVID-19 risk assessments, testing, cleaning, visiting arrangements, protective equipment and staff training had also improved.
This was not a full inspection. The Safe question was inspected but not rated, and the other questions were not reviewed. The overall rating therefore remained Requires Improvement from the previous inspection.
Safer medicines
The home had improved its medicine systems. Records were clear, medicines were suitably stored, and staff were trained and assessed as competent.
“Effective systems were now in place to ensure people received the right medicines and at the right time.” from the report
COVID-19 controls
The home had risk assessments, testing arrangements, extra cleaning checks and safe visiting procedures. Staff were observed wearing protective equipment appropriately.
“The provider maintained stocks of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and we observed staff wore PPE appropriately in line with government guidelines.” from the report
Updated planning
The provider had updated its COVID-19 policies and contingency plans to reflect current guidance and best practice.
“Following the last inspection, the provider had reviewed and updated their policies and contingency plans for COVID-19” from the report
Medicine stock check error
needs fixingOn one occasion, a medicine audit did not identify a possible pharmacy error and recorded the wrong quantity. The manager investigated after inspectors raised it and took action.
“However, we found on one occasion that staff carrying out the audit had failed to identify a mistake, potentially from the pharmacy, and did not record the right quantity of a medicine received into the home.” from the report
Missing medicine protocol
needs fixingOne person had a meal replacement drink prescribed as a medicine to be given when required, but there was no protocol explaining when staff should give it.
“One person who was taking a meal replacement drink as PRN did not have a protocol in place.” from the report
- 01What protocol is now in place for the person's meal replacement drink given when required?
- 02What changes were made after the medicine stock quantity error, and how are audits checked for similar mistakes?
- 03What evidence can you show that medicine records and stock checks remain accurate?
- 04How are testing, cleaning, visiting checks and protective equipment arrangements being kept up to date?
- 05What improvements from the previous inspection remain to be completed, and when will the next comprehensive inspection take place?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of specific parts of Safe, including medicines and infection prevention and control; the other questions were not assessed and the previous overall Requires Improvement rating remained. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 August 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.
Every inspection of Keevan Lodge
5 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2021Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 January 2011.
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 Enfield
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. 79 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Over the time he spent with them he got to know our parents very well and became like part of the family, even joining in family celebrations.”
“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.