CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Meadow Acres
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with all five areas rated Good.
This was an unannounced inspection on 29 November 2019. One inspector spoke with people, staff and relatives, observed care, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home supported eight people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found people felt safe, staff were kind and knew people well, and people were supported to make choices, build independence and take part in activities.
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 on 10 June 2017.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe, and relatives said the service gave them reassurance. Staff had training on safeguarding and knew how to report concerns.
“People felt safe living in the home and their relatives told us that the service gave them "Peace of mind" for their relatives.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices and develop everyday skills. Staff used positive risk-taking to balance safety with independence.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and communicated according to their individual abilities. Inspectors saw staff protect people's privacy and dignity.
“People were treated with dignity and respect. We observed staff knocking on people's doors before entering and calling out to people to ask if it was ok to enter.” from the report
Community activities
People could take part in activities suited to their interests and maintain friendships and family relationships.
“People were able to frequently access the community for personalised activities.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and support my relative's individual risks while still helping them make choices and build independence?
- 02What training have staff completed for the specific conditions and communication needs of people living in the home?
- 03How will you support my relative to attend health appointments or communicate with hospital staff if needed?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative, based on their interests?
- 05How are relatives' feedback and any complaints recorded, answered and used to improve the home?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and the care provided; all five ratings were given as Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 January 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, June 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but medicines storage temperatures and some records needed attention.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 22 May 2017. One inspector spoke with people using the service, relatives, staff, a social care professional and the registered manager. They also reviewed care records, staff files and management records.
The home supported eight people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found that people were safe, cared for kindly and supported by trained staff. Care was personalised, and people were helped to take part in activities and make choices.
The inspection found some areas to improve. Three of four medicine storage areas were above the recommended temperature, the office containing private information was not always locked, and daily records were sometimes too limited. The registered manager said action was being taken.
The home was rated Good in all five areas and overall. This was the same rating as at the previous inspection.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse, and risks were assessed with measures to reduce them.
“People told us they felt safe living in the service.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff received training, supervision and support to meet people's health and care needs.
“Staff had received appropriate training, support and development to help them carry out their role effectively.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people thoughtfully and respectfully. People were supported to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“People told us and we observed that staff were kind and caring towards them.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's interests, preferences and life history. People were supported with activities, family contact and individual routines.
“People's care records contained personalised information about them, such as their hobbies, interests, preferences and life history.” from the report
Medicine storage temperatures
needs fixingThree of four medicine storage areas were above the recommended maximum temperature. The registered manager changed the monitoring arrangements during the inspection.
“We checked four medicines storage facilities and found that three exceeded the recommended maximum temperature of 25 degrees centigrade.” from the report
Private information not always secured
needs fixingThe office containing people's personal information was left open when staff were not present. A keypad lock had been fitted, but it was not always used.
“Since the previous inspection a key pad lock had been installed to help staff to keep people's information safe but this was not always used.” from the report
Daily records lacked detail
minorDaily records were completed, but inspectors said the information did not give a full picture of people's wellbeing and mood. The registered manager agreed to improve record keeping.
“We saw that these were completed at the end of each shift however, the information was very limited such as, "Slept well, no issue.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to medicine temperature checks after three storage areas were found to be above 25 degrees?
- 02How do you now make sure the office containing private information is locked whenever staff are not present?
- 03What changes have been made to daily records so they give a fuller picture of each person's wellbeing and demeanour?
- 04How are people and their families involved in reviewing personalised care plans and choosing activities?
- 05How do you check that staffing levels continue to match people's changing needs?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five areas; the home remained Good in every area, as at the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 June 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 Meadow Acres
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 2010.
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.