CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Lime Court Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People generally felt safe, and inspectors found safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments, enough staff overall and safe medicines arrangements. Some people said they occasionally waited for staff, so the manager was asked to monitor this.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, and people received suitable food, drink and healthcare support. Inspectors noted that some people were taken to the dining room early and could wait a long time for lunch.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, patient and respectful. Inspectors saw staff taking time to support people with eating and helping a distressed person to become calmer.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and people and relatives were involved in care planning. Activities reflected people's interests, and the home supported communication, relationships and end-of-life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff were positive about the management. Audits, surveys, meetings and lessons learned were used to monitor and improve the service, although the staff survey response was low and included concerns about workload.
What inspectors found, December 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with some improvements needed to the environment for people living with dementia.
Inspectors visited the home without warning on 13 November 2018. They spoke with people, relatives, managers and staff. They observed care during meals and activities and checked care plans, staff records and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People generally felt safe and said staff were kind, attentive and respectful. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable training and good links with health professionals.
The home had activities, personalised care plans and arrangements for complaints and end-of-life care. Inspectors noted some concerns about the environment, including limited dementia-friendly signs and lifted flooring around two toilets. They made a recommendation, but found no serious risks or legal breaches.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw a calm atmosphere and staff giving people time, encouragement and privacy. People and relatives spoke warmly about the staff.
“The staff were caring. The atmosphere in the home was calm and friendly.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff overall and safe recruitment checks. Medicines were given by trained staff and were stored safely.
“Medicines were managed and administered safely.” from the report
Personalised support
People and relatives helped plan and review care. Plans included personal preferences, beliefs, communication needs and end-of-life wishes.
“People and their relatives were actively involved in their care planning.” from the report
Good health support
The home worked well with district nurses, GPs and other professionals. Inspectors found that staff responded when people's health changed.
“The service had good relationships with the district nurse and other healthcare professionals.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could choose from varied activities and took part in events outside the home. Staff supported personal interests and family links.
“Activities include music therapy, singing, children visiting, animals – pet the dog and a petting zoo came a couple of weeks ago” from the report
Dementia-friendly environment
needs fixingSome corridors lacked signs, orientation clues and points of interest. Several bedrooms did not have room numbers or names, which could make finding rooms harder for people living with dementia.
“We recommend that the service finds out more about current best practice, in developing a more supportive environment in relation to the specialist needs of people living with dementia.” from the report
Occasional waits for staff
needs fixingAlthough most people felt staffing was sufficient, some said they sometimes waited too long for help, including getting up in the morning. The manager was asked to monitor this.
“Sometimes they can't get me up very early as they haven't got the staff.” from the report
Building maintenance
minorFlooring around the edges of two toilets had lifted. The manager showed inspectors that refurbishment was planned for the remaining toilets.
“We did note that some of the flooring around the edges of two of the toilets had lifted” from the report
Timing of lunch
minorSome people were taken to the dining room quite early and waited for lunch for a while. The manager said this would be monitored to ensure it reflected people's choices.
“We did note that people were supported by staff to go to the dining room quite early which meant some people were waiting for lunch for quite a while.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to signs, room numbers and orientation clues for people living with dementia?
- 02How do you monitor response times when people use their alarm or need help getting up?
- 03Have the lifted toilet floors been repaired, and what is the timetable for the remaining refurbishment?
- 04How do you make sure people are not taken to the dining room too early and left waiting for lunch?
- 05What actions were taken in response to staff comments about workload?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, and the Good ratings continued from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 December 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 Lime Court Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 December 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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.