CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Laverstoke Gardens
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe recruitment, clear risk assessments and appropriate safeguarding arrangements. Medicines were stored and recorded safely, and infection control measures were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training and regular supervision. People's dietary, healthcare and communication needs were assessed and supported, and consent and legal safeguards were considered.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with dignity and respect. People and relatives were involved in decisions, and support encouraged choice and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's preferences and communication needs. People were supported with activities, relationships, community access and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found the home well managed, with positive feedback about leadership. Quality checks, staff involvement and feedback from people and relatives supported oversight of the service.
What inspectors found, April 2022
Laverstoke Gardens was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
Inspectors carried out an unannounced routine inspection on 21 March 2022. They spoke with people, staff, the manager and relatives. They also checked care records, staff files, medicines, safety records, complaints and quality checks.
The home supported up to seven autistic people or people with a learning disability. Inspectors found that people were treated with dignity and respect, supported to make choices and helped to remain independent. Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences, including communication, activities and end of life wishes.
Inspectors found safe medicine arrangements, suitable staffing, clear risk assessments and good infection control. Staff were trained and people's food, drink and healthcare needs were met. The home was clean and well maintained.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. This was the same rating as the previous inspection, published on 28 November 2017.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make personal choices and remain independent where they could. Staff used prompting rather than taking over tasks.
“The home enabled people to exercise their own personal choices and remain independent in the aspects of their lives they were able to.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored securely, access was restricted and records were complete. Staff had received medicines training.
“Medicine Administration Records (MAR) were signed for correctly with no gaps or omissions.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, communication methods and chosen activities. Relatives were involved in care plan reviews.
“Records clearly detailed peoples preferences in their care, such as how they liked to spend their time and how they liked to be cared for by staff.” from the report
Clean and suitable home
The building was clean and well maintained. People's rooms were personalised, and communal areas included sensory equipment.
“The premises were very well kept and clean throughout.” from the report
Good leadership
Inspectors found that the home was well managed and that staff, people and relatives felt listened to. Quality checks were used to identify and address improvements.
“Quality assurance audits were clear in their monitoring and review of the service to ensure that any improvement areas were promptly identified and remedied.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people currently supported to access the community, including activities, work placements, swimming and places of worship?
- 02How will you assess and record my relative's communication methods and personal preferences?
- 03How are relatives involved in reviewing and updating care plans?
- 04How do you check that medicines continue to be given and recorded safely?
- 05What training and supervision will the staff supporting my relative receive?
This was an unannounced routine inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control measures. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 April 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, November 2017
Laverstoke Gardens: Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and responsive care, but staff had not yet received mental health training.
This was an unannounced inspection on 25 October 2017. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, staff and the registered manager. They reviewed care records, staff files, training and medicine records, rotas and other management records. Feedback was also sought from relatives and health and social care professionals.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, supported to manage risks and given medicines safely. Staffing was stable, and extra staff were provided when people needed more support.
People were treated with kindness and respect. They were involved in decisions about their care, activities and food. Care plans were detailed and available in written and pictorial formats. The registered manager was approachable, and audits were used to identify and make improvements.
There was one shortfall in staff training. Staff had not yet been trained to support people with mental health needs and had limited understanding of these conditions. After this was discussed, mental health training was booked for the following day. The overall Good rating means inspectors judged the home to provide a good standard of care at this inspection.
Safe care
Safeguarding procedures were followed, risks were assessed and managed, and medicines records were accurately completed.
“Staff followed safe medicine administration procedures to ensure that people took their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
Inspectors saw staff protect people's privacy and dignity and support them with kindness and respect.
“People told us they were treated with respect and kindness.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's histories, preferences and needs. Pictures were used to help people understand their care and take part in decisions.
“Care records contained a lot of personal information to people, including their history, preferences, hobbies and important contacts.” from the report
Activities and choice
People chose their food, activities and social opportunities. They were supported to go out, attend classes and maintain interests and relationships.
“People participated in various weekly activities that reflected their interests, including reading books, spending time with their families, watching movies and listening to music.” from the report
Accessible management
The registered manager was available to people and staff. Audits and staff meetings helped identify and address issues.
“The registered manager was aware of their responsibilities, including the different forms of statutory notifications they had to submit to CQC as required by law.” from the report
Mental health training
needs fixingStaff had not received training for the mental health needs of people supported by the home and had limited understanding of these conditions. Training was booked for the next day after inspectors raised the issue.
“However, we found that the training was not provided and staff had a limited understanding about the mental health conditions.” from the report
Staff development
minorStaff said they lacked opportunities to develop in their roles. The manager used one-to-one meetings and additional responsibilities to address this.
“However, staff felt they lacked opportunities to develop in their role.” from the report
- 01Was the mental health training booked after the inspection completed, and what did it cover?
- 02How do you check that staff understand and can follow people's mental health support plans?
- 03How are staffing levels changed when someone needs extra support for appointments, shopping or holidays?
- 04How are care plans reviewed when a person's health or support needs change?
- 05What opportunities are now available for staff to develop their skills?
This was an unannounced inspection of all five areas, carried out by one inspector who spoke with people, staff and the manager and reviewed care, staffing, medicines and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 November 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 Laverstoke Gardens
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- April 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 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 Wandsworth
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. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
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.