CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Margaret Allen
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines, risks, staffing, recruitment and infection control were generally managed safely, although some call bell responses had taken more than 10 minutes.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, people had access to health professionals, and nutrition and hydration risks were monitored. Inspectors found little signage or use of colour to help people living with dementia orientate themselves.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind, compassionate and respectful. Inspectors saw staff giving people choices, supporting independence and protecting privacy and dignity.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and people could make choices about their daily routines. Activities did not always take place and some people felt there was not enough to do.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had clear management arrangements, regular audits and an improvement plan. People, relatives and staff were positive about the new management and communication.
What inspectors found, September 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with improvements still needed to dementia-friendly surroundings and activities.
Inspectors visited on 7 and 9 August 2019. The first day was unannounced. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and a health professional. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicines, staff records and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe and were happy with the care. Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, dignity and respect.
There were some areas to improve. The home had little signage or colour to help people living with dementia find their way around. Feedback about activities was mixed, and planned activities did not always take place. The provider was also asked to improve the presentation of pureed meals and call bell response times.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement, published in November 2017. The report says there had been a change of provider and management, and this was the new provider's first inspection at the location.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives consistently spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff spending time with people and supporting them in an unhurried way.
“Throughout the inspection, we saw staff took time to spend with people; assisting them with daily tasks in an unhurried manner” from the report
Safe medicines and risk management
Medicines were stored and given safely by trained staff. Risks such as pressure damage and swallowing difficulties had been identified and managed.
“Systems were in place to ensure the safe management of people's medicines.” from the report
Good links with health professionals
The home made appropriate referrals and followed professional advice. Inspectors saw staff supporting exercises recommended by an occupational therapist.
“Health professionals confirmed the service worked well with them, referrals were appropriate, and their recommendations were followed.” from the report
Personalised choices
People could choose when to get up, go to bed and have a bath or shower. Staff involved people and relatives in care planning.
“People said the daily routines were flexible and they were able to make every day decisions about their care.” from the report
Dementia-friendly environment
needs fixingThere was little signage or use of colour to help people living with dementia find their way around independently. Inspectors recommended seeking advice on environmental adaptations.
“There was little signage or use of colour to support people living with dementia to be able to orientate themselves independently.” from the report
Activities were inconsistent
needs fixingSome people said there was not enough to do. Activities were advertised for three days a week, but they did not always take place.
“There was a programme of activities advertised, which were planned three days a week, either in the morning or in the afternoon, but these did not always take place.” from the report
Call bell response times
needs fixingThere were 13 recorded responses of more than 10 minutes in the month reviewed, mainly at busy times. The provider was working to improve this.
“A review over the past month showed a response time of over 10 minutes in 13 cases; these were mainly during busy times in the morning and after lunch.” from the report
Presentation of pureed meals
minorOne person's pureed food was mixed together and looked unappetising. The issue was seen again on the second inspection day, and the manager planned to review the practice.
“However, we saw the same practice on the second day of the inspection.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to signage, colour and other features to help people living with dementia find their way around?
- 02How often do activities now take place, and how are they matched to each person's interests?
- 03What is the current average call bell response time, especially during busy periods?
- 04How do you make sure pureed meals look appetising as well as meeting people's dietary needs?
- 05What improvements were completed after the previous Requires Improvement rating and the 2019 improvement plan?
This was a full inspection covering all five ratings, including the premises and care provided; the first day was unannounced. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 September 2019 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 Margaret Allen
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- September 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 August 2018.
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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.