CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kelvedon House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe, staff understood safeguarding and individual risks, and staffing was judged sufficient during the inspection. The controlled-drug storage unit was not secured to the wall on one floor, but this was immediately addressed.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff said training helped them support people's specific needs. People had choices about food and received support with healthcare, although some people said menus could offer more variety.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw respectful and reassuring communication. People were supported to make choices, maintain independence and receive care in line with their preferences.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Staff understood people's personal histories, wishes and changing needs. People had access to activities and trips, but some people on the upper floors were not engaged in activities during the inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a registered manager and regular checks covering areas such as medicines, infection control, equipment and the environment. Inspectors saw that action had been taken when checks found improvements were needed.
What inspectors found, August 2018
Kelvedon House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with some minor issues addressed during the inspection.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 4 and 6 July 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files, incident records and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives generally said people were safe, well cared for and treated with respect. Inspectors saw staff supporting people in a friendly and respectful way.
There were some issues. A controlled-drug storage unit was not fixed to the wall on one floor, but this was put right immediately. Some people on the upper floors were not taking part in activities, and the home was developing new reminiscence activities.
Staffing and safety
Inspectors found enough staff available during the visit. Staff understood people's risks and knew how to report suspected abuse.
“People were supported by sufficient staff and during the inspection we observed that staff were available to support people.” from the report
Respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw friendly communication, respect for choices and support for independence.
“Staff were caring and treated people with respect.” from the report
Healthcare support
People's health needs were monitored, and staff worked with healthcare professionals when needs changed.
“People's healthcare needs were monitored to make sure any changes in their needs were responded to promptly and people had access to health and social care professionals.” from the report
Activities and choice
People could choose how to spend their day and took part in group and individual activities, including trips outside the home.
“People were supported to enjoy a wide range of activities and were involved in their day to day care and chose how to spend their day.” from the report
Controlled-drug storage
needs fixingOn one floor, the controlled-drug storage unit was not secured to the wall as required. The home addressed this immediately after inspectors raised it.
“We did note that the storage unit for controlled drugs was not secured to the wall as required, on one floor.” from the report
Some people not engaged in activities
needs fixingSome people who remained on the upper floors were not taking part in activities during the inspection. The home had recognised this and was developing reminiscence shops.
“On the upper two floors we saw although there were jigsaws, games and books available to people who remained at the home some people were not engaged in any activities.” from the report
Mislaid care-plan memory stick
minorA password-protected memory stick used to print care plans had been mislaid. The home changed its arrangements and inspectors advised it to obtain further data-governance advice.
“During the inspection we were advised that a password protected computer memory stick used for printing people's care plans had been mislaid.” from the report
- 01What activities are now available for people who remain on the upper floors, and how do you check that they are meaningful for each person?
- 02How do you now secure and check controlled-drug storage on every floor?
- 03What changes were made to the menus after people asked for more variety?
- 04How are staffing levels being maintained while recruitment is ongoing?
- 05What safeguards are now in place for printing and storing people's care plans?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five questions; each rating remained Good from the previous inspection in July 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 August 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 Kelvedon House
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- August 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 March 2014.
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 Sandwell
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 £950 to £1,190 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“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.