CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Matrixcare
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Staff understood safeguarding, people's risks, infection control and medicines. Inspectors noted that fire risk assessments were not personalised to each person's needs and that personal emergency evacuation plans were planned.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, and people were helped to make decisions and access healthcare. People had choices about food, with support for special dietary needs and choking risks.
- Caring?
- Good
- People had positive relationships with staff who knew them well and treated them with dignity. People were involved in their care and supported to build independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's individual needs and preferences. People were supported with activities, friendships, family contact and complaints, but end of life wishes were not recorded in care plans.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager was approachable and quality checks were carried out. Inspectors noted that questionnaires for families and professionals had not yet been sent, and positive comments from community professionals were not formally recorded.
What inspectors found, July 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records and feedback processes still needing improvement.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 9 July 2018. One inspector visited the home, which was supporting two people at the time, although it could accommodate up to four people with learning disabilities or autism.
Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, a family member, staff and the registered manager. They observed care and reviewed care records, medicine records, audits, incident reports, training records and other checks.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were supported by staff who knew them well, respected their choices and helped them stay safe, healthy and involved in their community.
Inspectors identified some improvements still needed. Fire evacuation plans were not yet personalised for each person, end of life wishes were not recorded in care plans, and formal questionnaires had not yet been sent to families and professionals.
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored securely, given as prescribed and checked regularly. Staff had training and their competence was assessed.
“People's medicines were managed well through robust systems.” from the report
Kind relationships
People appeared comfortable with staff and could approach them for help, reassurance or conversation. Staff supported privacy, dignity and independence.
“People were supported to spend their days as they choose and enjoyed positive caring relationships with facilitators.” from the report
Personalised care
Staff knew people's routines, communication methods, interests and support needs. Care records were updated to reflect current needs.
“People received care and support which was personalised to their individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Choice and community life
People chose how to spend their days and were supported with outings, hobbies, friendships and family contact.
“Each person was supported to peruse an active social life, hobbies and interest.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider and manager carried out regular checks, including medicine and health and safety audits. These checks had led to improvements in some areas.
“The provider and, registered manager had effective management systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of service people received.” from the report
Emergency evacuation plans
needs fixingFire risk assessments were in place but were not personalised for each person's needs. The manager said personal emergency evacuation plans would be put in place.
“they were not personalised to each person's needs, [to assist safe evacuation of the home in the event of an emergency].” from the report
End of life wishes
needs fixingPeople's end of life wishes had not been recorded in their care plans. The manager said this would be addressed.
“people's end of life wishes as they were not recorded in people's care plans.” from the report
Family feedback
minorThe provider had not yet sent questionnaires to families and professionals about their experience of the care. A plan was in place to introduce this.
“The provider had not yet sent questionnaire to families and professionals to gain their views on their overall experience and opinions of the care provided.” from the report
- 01Have personal emergency evacuation plans now been completed for every person, and when were they last reviewed?
- 02How are each person's end of life wishes recorded and kept up to date?
- 03How do you now collect and act on feedback from families and health and social care professionals?
- 04How would staffing and support change if the home reached its maximum of four people?
- 05Can we see how medicine checks, care plan reviews and other quality audits lead to improvements?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions and the overall quality of the home; two people were living there at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 July 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 Matrixcare
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- July 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 March 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 Worcestershire
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. 85 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.