CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Marlborough House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Inspectors found that risks, medicines, infection control and equipment safety were managed appropriately, although work to cover hot water pipes and radiators was still under way.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had suitable training, supervision and appraisals. People were supported with nutrition, health appointments, communication and decisions under the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, friendly and respectful. People were involved in planning their care, and staff encouraged privacy and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised around people's interests, needs and preferences. People were supported to take part in activities, access the community and choose different holidays.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager promoted an open and inclusive culture and was visible in the home. Audits identified shortfalls and records showed that these were acted on promptly.
What inspectors found, March 2018
Marlborough House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some improvements still under way.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 18 January 2018. One inspector spoke with people using the service, staff and managers, and reviewed care records, staff files and management records.
The home supported 12 people with a learning disability. Inspectors found that people felt safe, medicines were managed safely, risks were assessed, and the home was clean. Staff were trained and supported, and people were helped with food, health appointments and daily living skills.
People were treated kindly and involved in their care. They received support based on their preferences, including activities, holidays and personal interests. The manager was visible and approachable, and the home had systems for checking quality and acting on shortfalls.
The home was rated Good in all five areas and Good overall. This was unchanged from the previous inspection on 17 July 2015.
Safe care
Inspectors found that risks were assessed for each person and that staff understood how to support people safely while building independence.
“Risk assessments set out control measures to reduce the risk.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people well and supported them in a friendly, thoughtful way. People's privacy and independence were respected.
“We observed that staff continued to engage with people in a friendly and thoughtful manner.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included people's hobbies, interests and preferences. People could choose activities and were supported to follow their own interests.
“This demonstrated that people were supported to engage in activities based on their preferences.” from the report
Strong oversight
The home had regular quality checks. Inspectors found that identified shortfalls were acted on promptly.
“There was a robust quality assurance system in place and shortfalls identified were promptly acted on to improve the service.” from the report
Weekend staffing
minorThe manager said the home had enough staff, but more staff were being recruited for weekends. Families should check whether this recruitment has been completed and whether staffing matches people's needs.
“they were currently recruiting more staff to work at weekends.” from the report
Building safety work
needs fixingWork was still under way to cover hot water pipes and radiators. This was intended to reduce the risk of burns.
“Improvements were underway to cover hot water pipes and radiators to reduce the risk of people burning themselves.” from the report
- 01Has recruitment for weekend staff been completed, and how do you make sure there are enough staff for people's needs at weekends?
- 02Have all hot water pipes and radiators been covered to reduce the risk of burns?
- 03What changes have been made to care plans to make them more personal and clearer for staff?
- 04How are people involved in choosing activities, trips and holidays?
- 05How do you check that people are supported to develop independent living skills without being over-supported?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the home was rated Good in each area. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 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 Marlborough House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- March 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 December 2016.
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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Suffolk
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. 17 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
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.