CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Orchard View
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed, staff understood safeguarding, staffing was sufficient and medicines were given on time and as prescribed. Incidents and accidents were reviewed so lessons could be learned.
- Effective?
- Good
- People’s needs and choices were assessed before they moved in. Staff had suitable training and supervision, and people were supported with food, healthcare, communication and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People said staff were kind and listened to them. Inspectors saw respectful support, privacy being maintained and encouragement for people to do things independently.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans described people’s preferences and support needs, and staff knew people well. People were supported to maintain relationships, use the community, communicate in suitable formats and take part in chosen activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open culture, with managers and staff who were supportive and understood their roles. Audits covered areas such as care plans, medicines, infection control, maintenance and health and safety.
What inspectors found, March 2020
Orchard View is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with the home larger than current best practice guidance.
This was an unannounced inspection on 28 January 2020. One inspector spoke with four people, three relatives and five staff. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines records, recruitment and management records.
The home supported eight people and could support up to nine. Inspectors found people were safe, medicines were managed properly, and staff had the training and support they needed. People were helped to make choices, stay independent, access healthcare and take part in activities.
People described the staff as kind and said they were happy. Care plans were personalised, and staff knew people well. Managers had systems to check quality and make improvements.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means inspectors found consistently good care at the time of this inspection. The previous inspection, published in April 2017, was also rated Good.
Kind and respectful staff
People said they were happy and staff were kind. Inspectors saw positive conversations, emotional support and respect for people’s choices and privacy.
“People told us they were happy living at the service and that staff were kind.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people’s likes, dislikes, preferences and goals. Staff involved people in writing plans and daily records.
“Support plans continued to be person centred and contained a good level of information about how people liked to be supported” from the report
Good safety and medicines systems
Risks were assessed, staff knew how to respond to safeguarding concerns, and medicines records and audits were complete.
“Medicines administrator records were complete. Medicines were regularly audited, and the count of medicines kept at the service was accurate.” from the report
Community involvement
People were supported to maintain relationships and take part in activities such as swimming, cinema trips, meals out, day centres and community visits.
“People told us that they led active lives and accessed a wide range of activities of their choice in the community.” from the report
The building is larger than current guidance
minorThe home is bigger than most domestic-style properties and larger than current best practice guidance. Inspectors said the design and setting reduced the possible negative impact, but families should ask how this works for their relative.
“The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties and larger than current best practice guidance.” from the report
Feedback surveys had not been returned
minorThe home had sent annual surveys to people, relatives, staff and professionals, but the completed surveys were not available when inspectors visited.
“At the time of the inspection these had not yet been received back by the service.” from the report
- 01How does the size of the home affect people’s privacy, sense of home and day-to-day experience?
- 02What feedback have you received from the latest surveys since the inspection?
- 03How are people and relatives encouraged to raise concerns, and how are complaints investigated?
- 04How will you support my relative to make everyday choices and remain as independent as possible?
- 05What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including both the premises and the care provided; all five ratings were given as Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 March 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, April 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with good support for independence.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 23 February 2017. Inspectors spoke with three people, the registered manager, the deputy manager, two staff and three health and social care professionals. They observed care, checked records and looked around the home.
The home supported eight adults with learning disabilities, including people with autism, Down's syndrome, complex needs and limited verbal communication. Inspectors found enough suitably skilled staff, safe medicine systems, suitable training and risk assessments. People were involved in their care and were supported with health appointments, food choices, activities and daily decisions.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This meant the home remained Good overall, the same as at the previous inspection on 5 March 2015.
Enough skilled staff
Inspectors found enough staff with the right skills and experience. Staff were not rushed and responded promptly when people needed support.
“there were enough staff with the appropriate qualifications, skills and experience to provide care which ensured people's safety and wellbeing.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, recorded and given safely. Staff were trained and checked that people had taken their medicines.
“Records showed that medicines were received, stored, disposed of, and administered safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff respected privacy and dignity, gave people choices and allowed them time to do things for themselves.
“Staff were patient and encouraged people to do what they could for themselves, whilst allowing people time for the support they needed.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's life histories, interests, preferences and support needs. Staff knew people well and updated plans when needs changed.
“Assessments were reviewed with the person concerned and their relatives and care plans had been updated as people's needs changed.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used regular audits, meetings and reviews of accidents and incidents to identify and address problems.
“There were effective quality assurance systems in place to monitor and review the quality of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01The report says there was a minimum of four staff per shift, increasing to five when needed. How is staffing reviewed for my relative's current needs?
- 02How would staff support my relative if they showed behaviour that could challenge the service?
- 03How are care plans updated when a person's health, communication needs or preferences change?
- 04What current Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisations or applications would apply to my relative?
- 05What activities, outings and opportunities for independence would be available for my relative?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, and the previous Good ratings from 5 March 2015 were reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 April 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 Orchard View
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 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
91 live-in carers within about an hour of Medway
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 £1,250 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
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.