CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Magnolia House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Magnolia House was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 28 October 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control measures during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that visitors were protected from infection, staff used protective equipment safely, and testing was available for residents and staff. They were also assured that staff training and working practices could help prevent infections and manage outbreaks.
The home had an infection prevention lead and enhanced cleaning of busy areas. Families could book visits, and people were supported to keep in touch with relatives and friends.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not provide an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Enhanced cleaning
A staff member had responsibility for infection prevention and control, and cleaning had been increased in busy areas.
“A member of staff was allocated as an infection prevention and control (IPC) Lead, they had implemented enhanced cleaning of high traffic areas.” from the report
Keeping families connected
One person was supported to buy a tablet for communication with family. Communal facilities were also available for other people to keep in contact.
“Staff had supported one person to purchase their own tablet to communicate with their family.” from the report
Arranged visiting
Relatives and regular visitors had been told about updated visiting arrangements and could book visits.
“Family members and regular visitors had been informed of updated visiting procedures and could book times to see their relatives.” from the report
Further development identified
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its infection prevention and control approach. The report does not say what specific improvement was needed.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now, and who is responsible for them?
- 02How often are high-traffic areas cleaned, and how is this checked?
- 03How are staff and residents tested for infections when needed?
- 04How can relatives book visits, and what rules currently apply to visiting?
- 05How are people with limited verbal communication supported to contact family and friends?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only; the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 November 2020 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, April 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some quality feedback and audit information still being completed.
This was a planned, announced comprehensive inspection on 23 February 2017. The inspector and an expert by experience spoke with people, a relative, staff and health professionals. They also observed care and checked care records, medicines, staffing, training, complaints, incidents and audits.
The home supported six women with learning disabilities and autism. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely and there were enough trained staff. Recruitment checks were also completed.
People were treated with dignity and respect. Their care was planned with them and their relatives, reviewed regularly and adapted to their needs. People were supported with food, health appointments, activities, choices and developing independence.
All five areas were rated Good, as was the overall service. This was unchanged from the previous inspection on 26 March 2015. Inspectors noted that some feedback results and an internal audit action plan were not yet available, but they did not report a breach of regulations.
Safe medicines
Medicines were securely stored, regularly checked and given as prescribed. Staff had refresher training and competency checks.
“Medicines continued to be managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed by their GP.” from the report
Independence
People were encouraged to do tasks for themselves, such as laundry and washing up, with the support they needed.
“People were supported by staff to undertake tasks and activities aimed at encouraging and promoting their independence.” from the report
Activities and choice
People took part in activities they enjoyed, both at home and in the community. Their suggestions, including a trip to an aquarium, were acted on.
“People were supported to participate in a range of activities which they enjoyed and met their needs.” from the report
Staff teamwork
Staff said communication was good and inspectors found visible leadership and regular meetings about people's needs.
“Staff told us they felt there was visible leadership within the service, and, they received clear direct management instructions, to ensure consistency.” from the report
Feedback results delayed
minorA questionnaire had been sent to relatives, but its results had not been collated when inspectors visited.
“The last questionnaire was sent out in October 2016, the results had not yet been collated.” from the report
Audit action plan unavailable
minorAn internal quality inspection had taken place, but its action plan was not yet available to the manager during the inspection.
“The recent inspection took place on 31 January 2017; the action plan had not yet been made available to the manager.” from the report
- 01When will the results of the October 2016 relatives' questionnaire be available, and what changes will follow from them?
- 02What actions came from the internal quality inspection on 31 January 2017?
- 03Who is currently responsible for managing the home while the registered manager is on extended leave?
- 04How are people's care plans and risk assessments reviewed when their needs change?
- 05How are people supported to choose activities and build their independence?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five areas, and the ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 April 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 Magnolia House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.