CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 32 Ringstead Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, staffing and recruitment were safe, medicines were handled properly, and infection control arrangements were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found person-centred leadership, regular quality checks, updated care plans, staff involvement and partnership working with health and social care professionals.
What inspectors found, April 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care, but this visit only checked safety and leadership.
The unannounced inspection took place on 23 March 2023. One inspector spoke with people, staff, managers, relatives and health professionals. They reviewed care records, risk assessments, staff files and the home's checks on quality.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines practice, risk assessments, fire safety arrangements and infection control measures. Staff understood people's needs and supported their choices and independence.
The home was described as person-centred and open. Relatives' views were gathered, care plans were reviewed, and the home worked with health and social care professionals.
This was a focused inspection. Effective, Caring and Responsive were not checked during this visit. Their ratings, and the overall rating, used ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection, which was published on 8 September 2018.
Risk management
People's risks were assessed and plans were in place to reduce them. Staff also had specialist guidance for behavioural support needs.
“People were safe because their needs were assessed, and plans were in place to reduce identified risks.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were given as prescribed. Staff had training and yearly competency checks, and medicines were stored securely.
“People received their medicines safely and in line with the prescriber's instructions.” from the report
Familiar staff
The staff team was well established and knew people's communication, choices and support needs well.
“People and staff knew each other well. The staff team was well established, with some having worked at the service for over 10 years.” from the report
Listening to families
The provider collected views from people and relatives and used them when developing the service.
“The provider gathered the views of people and their relatives and used these to shape the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have you checked that my relative's current care plan reflects any changes in their needs?
- 02What staffing levels will be in place for my relative, and how will the registered manager's time be divided between services?
- 03How would you support my relative if they have behavioural support needs or become anxious about healthcare appointments?
- 04How often are medicines competency checks completed, and how do you handle a medicines error or refusal?
- 05What infection control and enhanced cleaning arrangements would apply if there were an outbreak?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their ratings carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 April 2023 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, September 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some staff training overdue.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 28 June 2018. One inspector spoke with the manager, staff and a visiting manager, checked records, medicines, staffing and the refurbished building, and observed care. The person living there could not share their views directly, so inspectors also spoke with a relative and another professional after the visit.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found detailed care plans, safe medicines arrangements, suitable staffing at the time, kind relationships and activities based on the person's interests.
Some training for two staff members was overdue. Inspectors also found one faulty window restrictor, but the manager said it was repaired immediately after the inspection. The home had reopened on 4 June 2018 after a planned refurbishment.
At the previous comprehensive inspection in 2015, the provider had not met legal requirements about staffing. A focused inspection in January 2016 found that the required action had been taken and the Effective rating had improved to Good.
Personalised care plans
Care plans were detailed, current and tailored to the person's needs, preferences and communication. They gave staff clear guidance about how to provide support.
“Care plans were well organised, kept up to date and contained personalised information about the individual person's needs and wishes.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored and managed safely. Records matched prescriptions, staff training was checked, and there were no gaps in the administration signatures reviewed.
“People received their medicines as prescribed and medicines were stored and managed safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
Inspectors observed friendly relationships and found that staff knew the person well. Staff supported privacy, dignity, choice and independence.
“Staff treated people with dignity, respect and kindness.” from the report
Activities and independence
People were supported to choose activities, try new experiences and maintain relationships in the home and local community.
“People took part in activities they liked or had an interest in and maintained relationships with people that mattered to them.” from the report
Overdue staff training
needs fixingSome training for two staff members had not been updated within the expected timeframe. The manager later confirmed that the necessary training had been planned and booked.
“We noted that some training was overdue for two members of staff and had not been updated within the expected timeframe.” from the report
Faulty window restrictor
minorOne window restrictor in the first-floor lounge was faulty. The manager said it was repaired immediately after the inspection.
“We found a window restrictor in the first-floor lounge was faulty and brought this to the attention of the registered manager.” from the report
- 01Has all overdue staff training now been completed, and how do you check that training remains up to date?
- 02How will staffing levels change as more people move into the home?
- 03What checks are now in place to make sure all window restrictors and other refurbished premises remain safe?
- 04How is the person's care plan reviewed when their needs, behaviour or health changes?
- 05What is the current position on the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards referral mentioned in the report?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the home, care and all five CQC questions after the home reopened following refurbishment. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 September 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 32 Ringstead Road
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016Goodstayed GoodEffective: Requires improvement
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 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 Sutton
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 £1,230 a week. 81 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”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.