CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Martins
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Staff understood safeguarding responsibilities, risks were assessed and medicines were administered safely. Inspectors also found that incidents were reviewed and used to improve support.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the training and support needed for their roles. People were supported with food, healthcare, healthier living and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, compassionate and respectful. People were supported to communicate, make decisions, maintain relationships and become more independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were individual, clear and up to date. People were supported to follow their interests, use accessible information and take part in social activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open, positive and person-centred culture, with checks and audits used to monitor quality. There was no registered manager in post, but an application had been submitted.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Martins was rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care.
The inspection took place on 3 June 2019. One inspector spoke with both people living there, observed staff supporting them, spoke with the manager and four staff, and checked care, medicines, training and management records.
The home supported two people with autism or a learning disability. Inspectors found that people were safe and happy, supported by kind staff who knew them well. People were helped to communicate, make choices, develop independence and take part in activities they enjoyed.
All five CQC areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published in December 2016.
Choice and independence
People were supported to communicate better, make important decisions and develop their independence. Staff used the least restrictive approach they could.
“People had been supported to improve their communication and empowered to be involved in making important decisions about their care and treatment.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were ordered, recorded, given and disposed of through appropriate arrangements. Records were complete and people had regular medicine reviews.
“Medicine records were clearly completed without any errors or gaps.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw warm and comfortable relationships between people and staff. Staff understood people's needs and offered emotional support.
“Throughout the inspection we observed people and staff joking and laughing, clearly happy and comfortable in each other's company.” from the report
Active lives
People were supported to enjoy a wide range of interests and outings, including sports, social meals and trips away.
“People took part in a range of outings, which included trips abroad.” from the report
Registered manager vacancy
minorThere was no registered manager in post when inspectors visited. The manager had applied to become registered, but the application was still being processed at that time.
“There was no registered manager in post at the time of our inspection.” from the report
End of life wishes
minorNo one was receiving end of life care during the inspection. The manager said discussions about end of life wishes were planned for future reviews.
“The manager informed us they were due to discuss end of life wishes with people and their loved one's during the next planned reviews.” from the report
- 01Has the manager's application to become registered with the CQC been completed?
- 02How are people involved in decisions about their care, medicines and daily activities?
- 03How does the home support people to take positive risks while keeping them safe?
- 04Have end of life wishes now been discussed with each person and their loved ones?
- 05How does the home respond when people's needs or behaviour change?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the care provided and the care home premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 July 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, December 2016
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised support, with a possible improvement around people's involvement in medicines.
The inspection took place on 3 November 2016. One inspector spent time with people, spoke with three staff and the registered manager, and reviewed care plans, daily records, medicines information, staff rotas, safety records, incident reports, audits and feedback.
The home supports two people with autism and learning disabilities. Inspectors found that people were treated with kindness and respect, involved in decisions, and supported to develop independence, relationships, activities and community involvement. Staff understood people's anxieties and individual ways of communicating.
The home had enough trained staff, safe recruitment checks, medicines records without gaps, and systems for managing risks and emergencies. Staff training, health support, food arrangements, complaints handling and quality checks were also judged to be effective.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection on 19 January 2014 found that the service was meeting the regulations. This report does not describe a specific change since then.
Personalised daily life
People helped plan their routines, goals and activities. They could choose which staff supported them and were encouraged to build confidence and independence.
“There was a person centred culture where people were supported to have the lifestyle they chose.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
Staff knew people well, recognised signs of anxiety and supported them calmly. People's privacy, individuality and choices were respected.
“The home was run in a family style. It was warm, friendly and people's individuality was respected and nurtured.” from the report
Good community links
People were supported to go out, use different types of transport, try new experiences and keep in touch with family and friends.
“People had as many opportunities as they wanted to go out and about meet people and live an ordinary lifestyle.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Staffing was adjusted around people's needs and activities. Inspectors found medicine records were complete and staff understood how medicines should be managed.
“There were always enough trained staff on duty to meet people's needs.” from the report
People's voices included
People took part in care reviews, meetings, recruitment and service improvement. The home also had an easy-read complaints process.
“People, staff and relatives were involved, in a meaningful way, in shaping and improving the service.” from the report
More involvement with medicines
minorMedicines were managed safely, but the manager had agreed to consider whether people could have more control and involvement in this part of their care.
“The registered manager agreed to consider if there were opportunities for people to have more control of and involvement with their medicines, depending on their needs and wishes.” from the report
- 01How will you involve my relative in decisions about their medicines and support them to have as much control as possible?
- 02How will you match staff to my relative's preferences, interests and communication needs?
- 03How do you assess and review risks when supporting people to try new activities or travel in the community?
- 04How will my relative and our family be involved in care plan reviews and raising concerns?
- 05What support is available for my relative's health conditions, including emergency plans and contact with health professionals?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the home; the previous inspection on 19 January 2014 found that the service was meeting the requirements. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 December 2016 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
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 January 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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 £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.