CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Merrimans Respite Care Unit
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, staffing levels were sufficient, medicines were administered and recorded safely, and infection control arrangements were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before their stay. Staff had relevant training, dietary and healthcare needs were met, and consent and mental capacity arrangements were in place.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, privacy and respect. Relatives said staff knew people well, involved them in decisions and supported their independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised, including communication needs, routines, preferences and activities. Complaints were recorded, investigated and addressed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open and positive culture, regular audits, action plans after issues, and good communication with relatives, staff and other professionals.
What inspectors found, November 2022
Merrimans Respite Care Unit was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no evidence of harm from staffing concerns.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 10 November 2022. One inspector visited, an Expert by Experience spoke with relatives, and inspectors also spoke with staff and professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, recruitment files, training information and quality checks.
The home provides short stays and personal care for adults with physical and learning disabilities, giving carers a break. Inspectors found that people were safe, medicines were managed correctly, staff were trained, and risks were assessed. They also found kind, respectful and personalised support, with people involved in their care and activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The inspection was prompted partly by concerns about staffing levels, but inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from this concern. The rating remained Good, as at the previous inspection published on 29 August 2019.
Clear risk management
Risks to people's safety and wellbeing were assessed with clear instructions for staff. The home also kept personal emergency evacuation plans up to date.
“Risk assessments were clear and detailed and contained risk management plans for staff about how to reduce the identified risk.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that people were treated kindly and respectfully. Relatives said staff knew people well and had built good relationships with them.
“People were treated kindly and respectfully. The person we met seemed happy and relaxed and appeared to have a good relationship with the staff.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans covered people's routines, communication, health, food, preferences and independence. Staff used different communication methods to support people with complex needs.
“People received person-centred care which reflected their needs and preferences.” from the report
Positive leadership
Relatives, staff and professionals gave positive feedback about the management. Audits and action plans were used to monitor the service and make improvements.
“There was an open and positive culture at the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What are the current staffing levels during the day and night, and how are they adjusted for each person's needs?
- 02How is the two-staff medicines process working now, and what changes were made after previous medicines errors?
- 03What activities and outings are currently available, including opportunities for one-to-one activities?
- 04How will you support my relative's preferred communication methods and make sure their care plan is updated after each stay?
- 05How will you involve us in reviewing care, food choices, complaints and any changes in our relative's needs?
This unannounced inspection covered all five key questions and included infection prevention and control; the report says all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 November 2022 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, November 2020
Merrimans Respite Care Unit was inspected but not rated; infection control was mostly assured, but staff arrangements and repairs were unfinished.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 28 October 2020. Inspectors looked only at infection prevention and control because the local authority had identified part of the home as a designated setting for people discharged from hospital with a positive COVID-19 status.
Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing visitors from spreading infection, using protective equipment safely, supporting social distancing, admitting people safely and arranging staff testing. They also found clean, uncluttered areas, cleaning records and safe arrangements for meals, outdoor space and activities.
The home was not suitable for the planned designated setting at that time. Plans had not confirmed a dedicated staff team, and some repairs needed for good infection control were incomplete. The overall service and Safe question were marked 'Inspected but not rated', so this report does not give a full quality rating.
Clean and organised setting
The designated area was clean and uncluttered, with its own equipment and arrangements for providing food and drinks.
“The designated care setting was uncluttered and clean.” from the report
Cleaning checks
The home used daily cleaning records and monthly infection control audits.
“There were cleaning schedules in place with daily record sheets and monthly infection control which were audited by the management team.” from the report
Safe access and separation
The designated area was clearly identified, with coded access and safe entry and exit arrangements.
“The unit was not physically separate from the rest of the home but the doors in between were closed and accessed by key-codes.” from the report
Personal activities
The plan was to provide activities tailored to each person in their bedroom.
“The designated setting would provide tailored person -centred activities to people in their own bedrooms.” from the report
Dedicated staff team not confirmed
needs fixingThe home had not agreed plans for a dedicated team to work in the designated setting. This meant the setting was not suitable for its planned purpose at the time of inspection.
“plans had not been agreed to confirm a designated staff team” from the report
Infection control repairs unfinished
needs fixingSome repair work needed to maintain good infection control had not been completed.
“some repair works to maintain good infection control were not yet completed.” from the report
- 01Has the dedicated staff team for the designated setting now been agreed?
- 02What repair work was outstanding at the inspection, and when was it completed?
- 03How would people with a positive COVID-19 status be kept separate from other people using the home?
- 04How are cleaning schedules and infection control audits checked now?
- 05How would activities be tailored for a person staying in their bedroom?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other four questions were not covered. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 November 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.
Every inspection of Merrimans Respite Care Unit
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 December 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 Hillingdon
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 £1,320 a week. 81 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult times.”
“She has an unusual combination of kindness and firmness, is quite unflappable, physically strong, extremely savvy”
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.