CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Magdalen Close Hostel
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Magdalen Close Hostel was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 27 January 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control measures because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, supported testing, followed social distancing and shielding rules, and had suitable cleaning and hygiene arrangements. They also found that the home had plans to prevent and manage infection outbreaks.
The home was clean, and people had access to activities, gardens, animals and other spaces during lockdown. The inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a rating for Safe.
Clean and hygienic premises
The home was very clean. Cleaning schedules covered touch points, and completion was checked regularly.
“The premises were very clean and hygienic.” from the report
Infection testing records
There was a clear system for recording COVID-19 testing and vaccination information for people and staff.
“There was an established registered manager in place, who had a clear system for recording all COVID-19 testing undertaken on people and staff” from the report
PPE and hand hygiene
Staff had access to PPE and suitable facilities for washing and sanitising their hands.
“Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and appropriate handwashing and sanitising facilities were available to staff.” from the report
Support during lockdown
People were supported to take part in activities and use outdoor spaces during lockdown.
“People were supported with activities and outside space during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently recording COVID-19, flu and other relevant testing and vaccination information?
- 02How do you now monitor people's health, including the baseline observations mentioned in the report?
- 03How are staff grouped or allocated to houses to reduce the spread of infection?
- 04What activities and outdoor access are available now, including for people who cannot go out into the community?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not rate the overall service or the other four key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 February 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, March 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with the home remaining Good in all five areas.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 01 February 2018. One inspector observed care, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care files, recruitment records, training records and quality checks.
The home supported up to 22 people with learning disabilities or autism, although 11 people were living there at the inspection. Inspectors found that people were safe, staff knew them well, and care was based on their wishes, needs and abilities.
People were supported to make choices, develop independence, take part in meaningful activities and access the community. Medicines, staffing, recruitment, infection control and complaints systems were found to be managed appropriately.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. The home had also been rated Good at the previous inspection.
Kind and knowledgeable staff
Staff knew people's histories, personalities and preferences. Inspectors saw patient and compassionate support, including when someone became anxious.
“Staff had an excellent understanding of people's backgrounds and they supported people to pursue their interests and hobbies, try new things and learn new skills.” from the report
Support for independence
People were encouraged to make decisions and develop daily living skills. Risk assessments aimed to protect safety while allowing as much freedom as possible.
“People were encouraged to be as independent as possible and empowered to take responsibility for their own lives and make their own decisions.” from the report
Good oversight
The management team carried out regular checks covering areas such as medicines, care planning and health and safety. The results were used to plan improvements.
“Regular audits of the quality and safety of the service were carried out by the registered manager, and team leaders.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you support my relative to choose activities and keep pursuing their interests?
- 02How would you help my relative build independence while managing their individual risks?
- 03How are relatives involved in creating and reviewing care and support plans?
- 04If my relative wanted to manage some of their own medicines, what assessment and supervision would be used?
- 05How do you use audits, feedback and complaints to improve my relative's care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, and all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 March 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 Magdalen Close Hostel
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 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.