CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Northumberland Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, staff recruitment checks were completed, and medicines were safely administered, stored and audited.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before they moved in. Staff had relevant training, worked with health professionals and supported people with meals, drinks and healthcare appointments.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They were asked for permission, offered choices and supported to be as independent as they wanted.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and included people's communication methods, interests and activities. People were supported to use local services and take part in events they enjoyed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a clear management structure, regular medicines audits and quality checks. Feedback from people and health professionals was positive.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Northumberland Road was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with all five areas rated Good.
This was a planned, announced inspection on 20 May 2019. One inspector spoke with two people, the manager and a care worker, and checked care records, medicines records, training records and management information.
Inspectors found that people were safe, treated kindly and supported to make choices. Their risks, health needs, medicines, meals, communication and activities were understood. People were supported to be independent and to take part in community activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection published on 20 December 2016.
Managing risks
Inspectors found that people's risks were assessed and that staff knew how to respond, including in relation to epilepsy.
“Risks were assessed and action taken to manage them.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, access the community and remain as independent as they wished.
“People were supported to be as independent as they wanted to be.” from the report
Personalised communication
Care plans explained how people communicated and how staff should interpret their actions, signs or behaviour.
“The registered manager and staff member were instructed to know how the person communicated and to understand how they made choices.” from the report
Medicines checks
Medicines were managed safely, with daily stock checks and a full audit each month.
“Audits for medicines were up to date and were managed monthly by the registered manager. No errors had been identified.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you keep my relative's communication method and positive behaviour guidance up to date?
- 02How are medicines, including as-required medicines, checked and reviewed for my relative?
- 03How will you support my relative to choose activities and remain as independent as they want?
- 04How will you work with health professionals if my relative's needs change?
- 05How many staff will usually be available, and what cover is provided when the manager or part-time care worker is unavailable?
This was an announced planned inspection that looked at the premises and care across all five CQC questions, including care records, medicines, staffing, training and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 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
Northumberland Road was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care in a small family-style home.
The inspection took place on 16 August 2016 and was announced 48 hours beforehand. One inspector spoke with three of the four people living there, observed care, spoke with the manager, and checked care records, staff files and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. People said they felt safe and happy. Inspectors found medicines were managed safely, people received healthcare when needed, and the manager understood safeguarding and mental capacity duties.
The home supported up to four people, including people with learning disabilities and autism. Care plans reflected people's preferences, people were supported to make choices and remain independent, and activities were arranged around individual interests.
The report describes a home run as a family home, usually with the manager as the only person on duty. One agency worker provided cover when the manager was unavailable. No breaches or enforcement action were reported.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and the manager understood the risks linked to their care. Medicines were administered, stored and disposed of correctly.
“People told us they felt safe at Northumberland Road.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw a calm atmosphere and found that people were treated with respect. People were supported to make choices, maintain privacy and build independence.
“There was a calm relaxed atmosphere at the home and we saw people were comfortable approaching and engaging with the registered manager.” from the report
Quality checks
The manager checked care records, medicines, accidents and incidents, and looked for ways to improve the service. A local authority check had not found areas needing improvement.
“The registered manager monitored accidents and incidents in the home and looked to see how improvements could be made to reduce any reoccurrence.” from the report
Reliance on one main carer
minorThe manager was usually the only staff member on duty. An agency worker provided cover when the manager was away or unwell, so families should ask how this would work if needs changed.
“The registered manager was usually the only member of staff on duty to support people who lived at Northumberland Road.” from the report
Informal feedback
minorThe manager did not use formal questionnaires to collect people's views. Instead, feedback was gathered through regular conversations, which the manager said was more suitable for the people living there.
“The registered manager explained she did not formally collect people's views, for example in the form of a questionnaire” from the report
- 01How is cover arranged when the manager is ill, on holiday or otherwise unavailable?
- 02What would happen if a person's care needs increased and one person on duty was no longer enough?
- 03How do you currently gather and record people's views about their care?
- 04How are decisions made when someone may not have capacity, including decisions about restrictions such as a locked external door?
- 05Are the care plans, medicines checks and safety arrangements still as described in this 2016 report?
This was an announced inspection of the overall service covering all five CQC questions, with observations, conversations and checks of records and quality monitoring. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 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 Northumberland Road
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
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
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 6 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Coventry
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 £950 to £1,260 a week. 80 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“My mum would not eat, drink, bath nor sleep without her. In short, she was FAMILY and we loved her dearly”
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.