CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Magnolia Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. They found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines systems, suitable risk assessments and good infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found approachable managers, a positive culture, regular feedback from people and staff, and systems for checking quality and safety.
What inspectors found, November 2023
Magnolia Court rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and strong management, but this inspection covered only safety and leadership.
The unannounced inspection took place on 25 October 2023. One adult social care inspector and one Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers. They observed care and checked care records, staff recruitment records, audits and other documents.
The home was rated Good overall, with Good ratings for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines systems, suitable risk assessments and good infection control. People were treated with dignity, offered choices and supported to stay as independent as possible.
People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the management team. The home had systems to learn from incidents, gather feedback and monitor quality. The report says only Safe and Well-led were inspected in this visit. Ratings for the other areas were carried over from the previous inspection in 2018.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Most staff had worked at the home for many years, supporting continuity.
“There were enough staff to keep people safe and meet their individual needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were administered by nursing staff, with regular checks of staff competency and medication records.
“Accurate records for the receipt, administration and disposal of medicines were kept.” from the report
Respectful care
Staff offered people choices, sought consent and supported independence, privacy and dignity.
“Staff consistently strived to ensure that people had the best possible care, and that they were supported in a compassionate, dignified and safe way” from the report
Strong management
People and staff described managers as approachable and supportive. The home used audits, meetings and surveys to monitor and improve its service.
“There was a positive culture throughout the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What is the current progress of the manager's CQC registration?
- 02How will you make sure staffing is sufficient for my relative's particular needs, including at night?
- 03How often are medicines audits completed, and what happens if an error or missed dose is found?
- 04How will you assess and review my relative's capacity and involve them in decisions about their care?
- 05How will my relative and our family be able to give feedback or raise concerns?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 November 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, October 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and well-managed support with no serious risks or concerns identified.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 30 and 31 August 2018. Inspectors spoke with seven people, 16 relatives and staff. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files, training records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, detailed risk assessments, safe medicines processes and suitable recruitment checks.
People were treated kindly and with respect. Their care plans reflected their needs, choices and preferences. They had access to activities, food and drinks suited to their needs, and health professionals when required.
The home had previously breached staffing requirements in 2016. A focused inspection in 2017 found that the improvements had been made. At this inspection, the Good rating continued and inspectors found no evidence of serious risks or concerns.
Safe staffing
Inspectors saw enough care staff to meet people's needs. Staff were available and did not appear rushed.
“Throughout the inspection we saw sufficient numbers of care staff available and they were not rushed.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were stored, given and recorded safely. Staff received training and their competence was checked.
“We looked at medicine administration records for people living at the home and found these to be clear and fully completed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff used a warm and gentle manner. People were involved in decisions and their privacy and dignity were maintained.
“Throughout the inspection we observed positive and caring interactions between people and the care staff that supported them.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's needs, choices, interests and preferences. Staff used this information to provide individual support and activities.
“Care plans were comprehensive and gave detailed insight into people's needs, choices and wishes on how they wanted to receive care and support.” from the report
Management oversight
The home used audits, meetings and feedback from people and relatives to monitor care and identify improvements.
“The registered manager and provider carried out a number of checks and audits to monitor and oversee the quality of care and support that people received.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you make sure there are enough staff on every shift, given the previous staffing breach in 2016?
- 02How would you support my relative if they need medicines hidden in food or crushed?
- 03How often will my relative's care plan and risk assessments be reviewed if their needs change?
- 04What activities would be available for my relative, including one-to-one activities if they prefer to stay in their room?
- 05How would you involve me in decisions about care, changes in health and end-of-life wishes?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 October 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 Magnolia Court
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Good
- August 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 February 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 Barnet
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 £1,300 a week. 83 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“The quality of life that she's given my parents has been priceless. The peace of mind she's given my sisters and I, through a very difficult time, has been invaluable.”
“Folasade is really kind, patient and respectful, has a fantastic sense of humour and such a positive outlook on 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.