CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Martins House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe, risks were assessed and managed, and inspectors found enough staff. Medicines records were complete and accurate, although some learning from incidents and fire safety actions still needed further development or completion.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff received training and supervision, consent was sought and people's nutritional and health needs were met. Parts of the building were refurbished, but other areas needed redecoration and one bathroom was unavailable because of maintenance problems.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. They knew people well, listened to their views and supported privacy, independence and contact with relatives.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care plans reflected people's individual needs, routines and interests. People had a wide choice of activities and staff took strong, sustained action to reduce isolation and support wellbeing.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff found the management visible and approachable. Audits identified shortfalls and action plans were used, but short-stay records did not always cover every area of support needed.
What inspectors found, October 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found especially responsive care, with some records and building work still needing attention.
Inspectors visited unannounced on 25 July and 02 August 2018. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also observed care and reviewed care records, risk assessments and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led were rated Good. Responsive was rated Outstanding. People told inspectors they felt safe, respected and listened to, and staff knew their needs and preferences well.
The strongest findings were about personalised care, activities and support to prevent people becoming isolated. Inspectors also found safe medicines practice, enough staff and good support with food and health needs.
There were some areas still being developed. These included redecoration, maintenance of a bathroom, learning from incidents, some fire safety actions and keeping all short-stay care records complete.
Activities and inclusion
People could choose from group and one-to-one activities, including trips and celebrations. Staff worked hard to prevent isolation and helped people regain confidence and socialise.
“People had access to a comprehensive range of activities which were based on people's individual needs and choices.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw friendly, relaxed interactions. Staff protected people's privacy and dignity and supported personal choices, including preferences about who provided personal care.
“People were treated in a dignified and sensitive manner.” from the report
End of life support
End of life plans recorded people's wishes, including where they wanted to spend their final days and who they wanted with them. The home worked with specialist health services.
“People receiving end of life care and their families were treated with exceptional care and compassion.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Inspectors found no errors or omissions in the medicines administration records they checked. Staff were trained and medicines stocks and records matched.
“People's received their medicines in accordance with the prescriber's instructions.” from the report
Short-stay records
needs fixingCare records on the short-stay unit did not always cover every area where people needed support. The report specifically identified missing as-required medicine protocols and the need for longer-term plans when people stayed longer.
“On the short stay unit care records needs to be maintained for all areas that people require support with.” from the report
Building condition
minorMuch of the home was described as drab and needing redecoration. One ground-floor bathroom was not being used because of maintenance issues.
“However, much of the home was drab and in need of redecoration” from the report
Fire safety actions
needs fixingActions from a recent fire assessment, including replacement emergency lights and a door alarm, were due to be completed at the time of the inspection.
“Following on from a recent fire assessment, the registered manager had put in place a number of actions which were due to be completed.” from the report
Learning from incidents
needs fixingStaff knew about recent incidents and the actions taken, but the process for turning this learning into everyday practice still needed further development.
“This process required further development to embed as daily practise.” from the report
- 01Have the fire assessment actions, including the emergency lights and door alarm, now been completed?
- 02Has the ground-floor bathroom been repaired and returned to use?
- 03How do you make sure short-stay care records cover all support needs, including as-required medicines?
- 04When is a longer-term residential care plan created if someone originally admitted for short-term care stays longer?
- 05How do you check that learning from incidents is being followed in daily practice?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions and the overall rating; it was the first inspection under the new provider. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 October 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 Martins House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- October 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- May 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 May 2017.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Hertfordshire
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 £1,300 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.