CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Maria Skobtsova House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff understood how to respond to abuse and risks. Medicines were generally managed safely, but some 'as required' medicines lacked care plans and records were not always signed.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training to meet people's needs. People were supported with food, health care, mental capacity decisions, activities and goals.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw kind and respectful interactions. People's privacy, dignity, independence, cultural needs and choices were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and people were supported to maintain interests, relationships and links with the wider community. Staff adapted communication to people's needs.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open, person-centred culture and systems for monitoring quality. However, medicine checks had not identified all the recording problems.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but medicines records were not always complete.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 23 October 2019. They spoke with five people living in the home, five support staff and managers. They reviewed care plans, staff training, medicines records and the home's checks.
People told inspectors they felt safe and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported people to make choices, stay active, build friendships and use local services. Inspectors found that care was personalised and people's health and social care needs were being met.
The main shortfall was with medicines records. Some 'as required' medicines did not have care plans, and records were not always signed when medicines were not given or were refused. Inspectors found no harm had resulted, but asked the provider to improve its practice.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same as the previous rating published on 26 April 2017.
Kind, enabling staff
Inspectors found a warm and friendly home where staff supported people with kindness and encouraged independence.
“People were at the heart of the service, and were cared for by very kind, caring and enabling staff.” from the report
People's views
People were involved in their care and their preferences were used when planning support.
“People's views were listened to, valued and used to design their individualised care and support.” from the report
Active lives
Staff helped people pursue hobbies, exercise, education, friendships and community activities.
“People's ongoing wellbeing was seen as an essential part of their care and support and staff were driven to help ensure people lived active and fulfilled lives.” from the report
Community links
The home worked with outside health professionals and helped people take part in their local community.
“The service was part of the local community and staff worked in partnership with external health professionals to ensure people's care was co-ordinated.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingSome care plans for 'as required' medicines were missing. Medicines administration records were not always signed when a medicine was not given or had been refused. Inspectors found no harm, but asked the provider to improve its practice.
“Care plans for medicines, prescribed to be taken 'as required' were not always in place.” from the report
Medicine checks
needs fixingThe home's monitoring system did not identify that some medicines records were missing or incomplete. The manager said immediate action would be taken.
“The provider had a monitoring tool to help identify where improvements were required. However, it had failed to identify that some records were not in place, and MARs were not always being signed.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to care plans for 'as required' medicines since the inspection?
- 02How do you now check that medicines administration records are signed when medicines are refused or not given?
- 03What evidence can you show that the medicines policy and processes now follow the improvements identified after the inspection?
- 04How is the new electronic care planning system being used, and are all care records now updated promptly?
- 05How will you support my relative's individual goals, interests, independence and links with the local community?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including both the care provided and the home premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 November 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.
What inspectors found, April 2017
Maria Skobtsova House: Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with one potential safety issue to follow up.
The inspection took place on 23 and 29 March 2017. It was unannounced on the first day. One inspector reviewed records, spoke with people, staff and managers, and sought feedback from health and social care professionals.
The home supported eight people with mental health and physical needs. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness, and supported by staff who understood their needs. Care plans were personalised, medicines were managed safely, and people were helped to stay independent and involved in decisions.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home had also been rated Good at the previous inspection, so the overall rating remained Good.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw positive relationships and a calm atmosphere. Staff understood people's individual needs and protected their privacy and dignity.
“People were well cared for by staff that had a caring attitude and treated them with kindness and compassion.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's choices, routines and preferences. Staff involved people, families and professionals in planning and reviewing support.
“Each person had individualised care plans that reflected their needs, choices and preferences, and gave detailed guidance to staff on how to make sure personalised care was provided.” from the report
Safe medicines and risk support
Inspectors found medicines records correctly completed. Staff understood people's risks and supported them to become more independent safely.
“Medicines were administered consistently and safely. No one was on medication without their knowledge (covert).” from the report
Good management
The home had a registered manager and staff said management was supportive and approachable. Audits, feedback and incident reviews were used to improve care.
“There was an effective quality assurance system in place to drive continuous improvement within the service.” from the report
Potential ligature points
seriousInspectors identified that possible ligature points in the home needed a risk assessment. The manager agreed to take action after the inspection.
“They agreed to action this following the inspection.” from the report
Audit records needed clearer completion checks
minorThe manager was asked to make sure that issues identified in internal audits were signed as completed. This was a record-keeping improvement rather than a reported injury or incident.
“ensuring where an issue had been identified this had been signed as completed on the internal audit forms.” from the report
- 01What action was taken to risk assess and address the potential ligature points identified after the inspection?
- 02How are staffing levels reviewed when people's needs or activities change?
- 03How will my relative be supported to become more independent with medicines, if this is suitable for them?
- 04How are hospital passports used, and will my relative and family be involved in keeping the information up to date?
- 05What activities and community opportunities would be available to match my relative's interests and support their independence?
This was a planned inspection of the overall service covering all five CQC questions; it was unannounced on the first day and included visits on 23 and 29 March 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 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 Maria Skobtsova House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Plymouth
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.
8 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
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.