CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kerria Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about the home’s infection prevention and control measures. This included PPE, testing, visiting, hygiene, safe admissions and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, July 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control and found plans to manage COVID-19 risks.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 17 June 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, supported testing, followed visiting and social distancing guidance, and had arrangements for safe admissions. They were also assured that the home could prevent and manage outbreaks.
The overall service and Safe rating were both recorded as “Inspected but not rated”. This means the visit checked specific infection control arrangements, rather than giving a full quality rating.
PPE and infection checks
Staff used PPE in line with government guidance. The registered manager carried out weekly observations of handwashing and PPE use.
“Staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) in line with current government guidelines.” from the report
Support for end-of-life visitors
Comfort boxes helped visitors stay comfortable while maintaining infection control when spending time with someone receiving end-of-life care.
“Comfort boxes were available for visitors of people receiving end of life care.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The home had plans to operate its two floors as separate zones during a COVID-19 outbreak, with staff assigned to particular floors.
“In the event of a COVID-19 outbreak, plans were in place to manage the two floors of the home as separate zones.” from the report
Flexible staff training
Some staff were trained to carry out tasks in different roles. The report says this helped the home reduce its use of agency staff.
“The provider had trained some staff members in elements of different roles.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are PPE use and handwashing checked now?
- 02How would you separate the two floors and staff if there was an infection outbreak?
- 03How are visits arranged for people receiving end-of-life care?
- 04How often are residents and staff tested when infection risks arise?
- 05Which staff have been trained to work across different roles, and how does this affect staffing?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not provide a full rating of the home or rate the other key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 July 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, May 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with some mixed views about activities.
This was an unannounced inspection on 22 March 2018. Inspectors spoke with seven people, four staff, two visiting health professionals and managers. They observed care and reviewed care records, staff files, medicines records, complaints, accidents and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, risks were managed, medicines were handled safely and staffing levels were enough to meet people's needs.
People received care from trained staff who treated them with kindness and respect. Their health, dietary, cultural and personal needs were recorded and supported. The home had systems to learn from accidents, complaints and audits, and the overall rating remained Good, as it had been at the inspection on 6 June 2017.
Safety and medicines
Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, staff were safely recruited and medicines were administered, stored and checked safely.
“People were protected from avoidable abuse. Risks were assessed, identified and managed appropriately.” from the report
Skilled support
Staff had relevant training and understood people's health, dietary and personal care needs. Health professionals were contacted when needed.
“This showed people were supported by suitable skilled staff.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm interactions and found that people were offered choices, treated with dignity and supported to keep their independence.
“This showed people were treated with kindness and given emotional support when they needed it.” from the report
Learning and improvement
The home reviewed accidents, complaints and audits, then used the findings to make changes. People and relatives also influenced improvements to menus, facilities and the home environment.
“This meant the systems in place were effective in identifying areas for improvement and actions to improve were taken promptly.” from the report
Activities were not consistent
minorSome people said there was not much to do and had not had the chance to go out. A planned activity could not take place because equipment was unavailable, although an alternative was offered.
“Some people told us they didn't feel there was much to do and had not had the chance to go out whilst others were engaged in activities.” from the report
Vacancies and agency staff
minorThe home was using agency staff while recruiting to vacancies. Inspectors found staffing levels were sufficient, but families may want to ask how this affects familiar staff and continuity.
“There were agency staff in use, whilst recruitment to vacancies was carried out.” from the report
- 01How often are the activities on the planner actually delivered, and what individual outings can you offer?
- 02How many vacancies are there now, and how often are agency staff used?
- 03Who is managing the home day to day when the registered manager is away?
- 04How will you make sure changes in people's needs are reflected promptly in their care plans?
- 05How are families involved in reviewing care plans and decisions about future or end of life care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions; the report says all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection on 6 June 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 May 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 Kerria Court
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- July 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 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 Birmingham
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 £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.