CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Mary's Home
Not yet rated: the CQC has not published a rated inspection for this home, which is usual for a new registration.
What inspectors found, October 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, but one fire door was not alarmed.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 6 September 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, a relative, staff, managers and a visiting health professional. They reviewed care records, staff files, medicines records and other records.
Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and appropriate safeguarding arrangements. Staff understood people's mental health needs and supported people with health appointments, food, activities and building independence.
People were treated with dignity and kindness. Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences and were reviewed regularly. The home had a complaints process and visible management, with audits and checks in place.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was unchanged from the previous inspection. The report says there was no evidence of serious risks or concerns.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs safely. Staff were available in communal areas and responded promptly.
“We observed there were sufficient staff to support people during our inspection.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines records had no omissions in the checks carried out. Staff were trained and assessed as competent to give medicines.
“Our checks of medicines records found no omissions and the medicines in stock were as expected.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were involved in decisions and staff respected their privacy, dignity and personal relationships.
“We observed when a person became distressed staff showed compassion in the way they comforted them.” from the report
Activities and independence
People were offered regular activities and support to build everyday living skills. Some people had moved on to more independent living.
“People were encouraged to maintain and build their independent living skills.” from the report
Strong management checks
The management team was visible and used audits, meetings and feedback to review the service.
“The provider had systems to audit and improve the service.” from the report
Unalarmed fire door
seriousInspectors found that a first-floor fire door was not alarmed. This could mean a person who needed staff support might leave without staff knowing. The manager said the risks would be reduced immediately, but the report does not confirm the final outcome.
“We identified the fire door on the first floor was not alarmed so a person who required staff support may be able to leave the premises without staff being aware.” from the report
Choking guidance needed updating
needs fixingStaff followed specialist guidance for a person at risk of choking, but the manager said the care plan was being updated so staff could review that guidance easily.
“The registered manager told us they were updating the person's care plan to ensure staff could review the guidelines at any time.” from the report
Limited survey responses
minorThe provider sought feedback from people, staff, professionals and relatives, but few surveys had been returned that year.
“although few had been received for the current year” from the report
- 01What action was taken after inspectors found that the first-floor fire door was not alarmed, and how was this checked?
- 02Has the choking guidance been added to the person's care plan, and can all relevant staff find it quickly?
- 03How are people involved in reviewing their care plans and expressing their preferences?
- 04What activities are available for someone with particular interests, faith or community goals?
- 05How would you support my relative to develop or keep independent living skills?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, and all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 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 Mary's Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 August 2015.
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 Croydon
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 £1,230 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.