CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Platters Farm Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, July 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with activities and dining experience still needing attention.
This was an unannounced inspection over three days in June 2021. Two inspectors spoke with five people, four relatives and nine staff. They reviewed care plans, medicine records, staff files and quality checks.
The inspectors found people were safe and that there were enough staff. Medicines, infection control, recruitment and risk management were handled well. People received support from trained staff and were helped to eat, drink and access health services.
People and relatives described the care as kind. Staff supported choice, privacy, dignity and independence. Care was personalised, communication needs were considered, and relatives could visit under the arrangements in place at the time.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found the home was meeting the relevant standards, although they noted that activities could sometimes be repetitive and that dining experiences had been affected by COVID-19 restrictions.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely.
“People's medicines were managed safely. The provider used an electronic medication record system.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff respected privacy, offered choices and encouraged people to remain independent.
“We observed caring and compassionate interactions between staff and people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's routines, preferences, communication needs and goals. Staff updated plans when people's needs changed.
“People were receiving person centred care. Care plans contained information about how people liked to be supported in all aspects of their care.” from the report
Health and nutrition support
People were supported to attend health appointments and maintain their health. The home monitored weight and provided extra calories when needed.
“People who were at risk of weight loss received additional calories such as prescribed fortified milkshakes.” from the report
Quality monitoring
Regular checks covered medicines, infection control and staff training. The home acted when audits identified problems.
“The service had good quality assurance systems in place.” from the report
Activities could be repetitive
minorActivities were available daily, but the manager and a relative said some activities could sometimes be the same. Ask what variety is now offered.
“Some feedback from relatives also told us that although there are plenty of activities sometimes, they can be the same.” from the report
Dining experience
minorCOVID-19 and social distancing rules meant the home could not provide the best possible dining experience at the time. The manager planned to review this when restrictions eased.
“COVID-19 and social distancing guidelines meant it was not possible to maximise peoples positive experience.” from the report
Information about hobbies
minorThe manager said information about people's hobbies was not always provided when they moved in. Families should explain their relative's interests clearly.
“The registered manager told us when people were admitted they wasn't always given information about people's hobbies.” from the report
- 01What activities are currently available, and how do you avoid them becoming repetitive?
- 02How has communal dining changed since COVID-19 restrictions affected the experience?
- 03How do you record a new resident's hobbies, interests and routines when they move in?
- 04How will you involve our family member in decisions about their care and preferred carers?
- 05How can relatives access care notes and receive updates about changes in care needs?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control; the previous rating was Good and had covered Safe and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 July 2021 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
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, well-managed care, with medicines errors still being monitored.
Inspectors visited on 6 October 2020 with very short notice. They spoke with four people, seven relatives, seven staff and one visiting professional. They reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was judged safe. Risks were identified and reviewed, staffing levels met people's needs, medicines were managed safely and infection control arrangements were in place. People and relatives said they felt safe and were happy with the care.
The home was also judged well-led. Quality checks had improved since the last inspection, and managers had better oversight of people's care. The overall rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only. The ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection.
Clear risk management
People's risks were recorded in detail and reviewed after changes or incidents. Staff understood how to support people safely.
“Risk assessments were detailed and provided staff with the necessary guidance needed to ensure they supported people safely, mitigated risks and met people's needs.” from the report
Enough trained staff
Staffing was matched to people's needs, with extra cover available when required. Recruitment checks and training were completed.
“There were enough staff deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Improved quality checks
The home introduced a care quality monitor and used audits and daily checks more effectively. This gave managers better oversight of care.
“The governance framework had ensured the delivery of high quality and safe care.” from the report
Open communication
People, relatives and staff said communication was good. Managers were described as approachable and involved with people in the home.
“The registered manager and their deputy had created an open and positive culture in the service.” from the report
Some medicines errors remained
needs fixingThe home had safe medicines systems, audits and staff checks, but inspectors noted that not all medicines errors had been prevented. The provider was considering electronic medicines records to improve this further.
“They recognised despite a robust policy and work to prevent medicines errors, they had not managed to prevent all medicines errors.” from the report
- 01How many medicines errors have there been since this inspection, and what action was taken each time?
- 02Were electronic medicines records introduced, and how have they changed medicines safety?
- 03How are staffing levels checked against each person's changing needs?
- 04How often are care records, risk assessments and fluid charts audited now?
- 05How will the home make sure the improvements found in Safe and Well-led are maintained?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection control; the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 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 Platters Farm Lodge
6 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 April 2013.
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.