CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Martham House
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed, including visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, hygiene and outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Outstanding
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, September 2020
Martham House: Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and found several good Covid-19 practices.
This was an announced, targeted inspection during the Covid-19 pandemic. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control in the home, rather than carrying out a full inspection of all areas of care.
Inspectors were assured that the home managed visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, hygiene and possible outbreaks. They also found that the infection control policy was up to date.
The home used pictorial information to help people understand Covid-19 and why staff wore masks. Managers and staff could access current guidance, and individual risk assessments were in place for staff where needed.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a graded rating for the quality of care or the other inspection questions.
Accessible information
The home used pictorial stories and different ways of explaining Covid-19, depending on people’s understanding.
“Pictorial stories had been developed for the service users and used to help to explain Covid-19 and its impact.” from the report
Up-to-date guidance
Managers and staff had a way to access current national guidance on protective equipment, visitors and new admissions.
“The provider had created a way for managers and staff to ensure they were always accessing up to date guidance on Covid-19.” from the report
Staff risk assessments
Individual risk assessments had been completed for relevant staff, including staff from Black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds.
“There were individual risk assessments in place for all Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) staff” from the report
Protective equipment
Inspectors were assured that protective equipment was being used effectively and safely.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently explain infection risks and safety rules to people who need information in different ways?
- 02How do managers and staff keep up to date with current infection prevention guidance?
- 03How often are individual staff risk assessments reviewed, including those relating to health risks?
- 04How are visitors, new admissions, testing and protective equipment managed now?
- 05What are the current arrangements for preventing and managing an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the Covid-19 pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not assess the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 September 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, July 2017
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found highly personalised, safe care, with Safe and Caring rated Good.
This was an unannounced inspection on 17 May 2017. Two inspectors met everyone living at the home, observed care and medicine support, spoke with staff, relatives and other professionals, and reviewed care plans, staff records, medicine records and quality checks.
The inspectors found that people received exceptional support for their learning disabilities, autism and other specialist needs. Staff understood people well, supported independence, managed risks and medicines safely, and helped people take part in activities, hobbies and community life.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Effective, Responsive and Well-led were Outstanding. Safe and Caring were Good. This means inspectors found very high standards overall, while the two Good ratings met the expected standard but were not judged exceptional.
Managing risk without unnecessary restriction
Staff supported people to remain safe while giving them as much freedom and independence as possible.
“Risks to the health, safety and well-being of people were addressed in a personalised and enabling way that promoted their independence.” from the report
Specialist staff training
Training covered people's individual health and support needs, including autism, epilepsy and positive behavioural support.
“Staff training needs were continually evaluated to ensure staff had the most up to date knowledge and skills to manage people's specialist needs effectively.” from the report
Meaningful daily lives
People had activities based on their own interests and were supported to take part in the local community.
“People had exceptional levels of engagement with their local community.” from the report
Strong quality monitoring
The home used several ways to gather feedback and had audits and action plans to identify and address improvements.
“Quality assurance systems were embedded and effective in ensuring new and innovative ways of further enhancing people's lives were always being explored.” from the report
Respect for dignity
Staff respected people's private space, choices, communication methods and personal routines.
“Care was consistently provided in a way which respected people's privacy and upheld their dignity.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are each person's current risks managed while still giving them independence and freedom?
- 02What specialist training do staff have for my relative's specific health, communication or behavioural needs?
- 03How often are care plans and risk assessments reviewed, and how is my relative involved?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative each day?
- 05How would my relative or family raise a concern, and how would the home make this accessible to them?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including observations, discussions with people and relatives, and reviews of care, staffing, medicines and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 July 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 Martham House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2017Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- January 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 April 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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.