CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Poldark
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found effective safeguarding, risk assessments, suitable staffing and safe medicine arrangements. They noted that handwritten medicine records needed to be double-signed.
- Effective?
- Good
- The person’s needs were assessed with family and professionals. Staff had relevant training, supported nutrition and healthcare, and followed the Mental Capacity Act principles.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were compassionate and respected privacy, dignity and individuality. The person appeared comfortable with staff and was supported to make choices and maintain family relationships.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. Communication support was tailored to the person, although relatives and staff were still discussing the best way to provide activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear management arrangements, regular oversight, good staff communication and quality monitoring. Relatives differed in how confident they felt about how the home was run.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Poldark was rated Good overall, with caring and personalised support, but medicines records and family confidence needed attention.
This was the home’s first planned comprehensive inspection. It was unannounced and took place on 15 October 2019. The inspector met the person living there, observed staff, spoke with staff and professionals, reviewed records and later spoke with relatives.
Inspectors found the person was safe, treated with kindness and supported by staff who understood their needs and communication. Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. Staff supported healthcare, family contact, activities, independence and access to the community.
The overall rating was Good. All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors noted that handwritten medicine administration records needed double signatures, and that relatives had differing views about whether their concerns would be heard.
Kind and respectful staff
Staff understood the person’s differences and preferences. Inspectors observed that the person appeared comfortable approaching staff for support.
“Staff were caring and compassionate.” from the report
Communication support
Staff worked with professionals and used several tools to help the person communicate in a meaningful way.
“The health and social care professional was complimentary in how the staff team wanted to maximum communication with the person” from the report
Family and healthcare links
The home supported regular family contact and worked with healthcare professionals when the person’s needs changed.
“The person was supported to maintain and develop relationships with those close to them.” from the report
Safe staffing and risk management
Staffing levels were reviewed when risks changed, and staff supported the person to try new experiences safely.
“The managers reviewed staffing levels, and when a risk had been identified, staffing levels were increased.” from the report
Medicine record signatures
needs fixingMost medicine records were completed appropriately, but handwritten entries needed two signatures. The manager said this would be raised with staff immediately.
“Staff need to double sign all handwritten entries of medicines on MAR records.” from the report
Activities still being agreed
minorRelatives and staff had not yet agreed how the person should take part in activities or how long activities should last to meet current needs.
“The relatives and staff were still debating how the person should be involved in the activities and the duration of the activities that met the person's current needs.” from the report
Family confidence
minorRelatives had different levels of confidence that the home was well run and that their concerns would be listened to and acted on openly.
“Their views varied in how confident they felt they would be listened to or that their concerns would be acted upon in an open and transparent way” from the report
Management registration
minorThe manager was still applying to become the registered manager for this home. At the time, the registered manager was overseeing three services.
“The manager was in the process of submitting their registered manager application with the Care Quality Commission for Poldark service only.” from the report
- 01What action was taken after inspectors said handwritten medicine records needed double signatures?
- 02How do you decide which activities are suitable, including how long they should last?
- 03How are relatives’ concerns recorded, investigated and reported back to them?
- 04Who is currently responsible for the home’s day-to-day management while the manager’s registration application is being processed?
- 05How do you use communication tools such as the communication diary, pain profile and talking mats in daily support?
This was the first planned comprehensive inspection and covered all five CQC questions; one person was living at the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 December 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.
Every inspection of Poldark
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 November 2018.
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
10 live-in carers within about two hours of Cornwall
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 £1,200 a week. 8 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“He had been a little anxious before she arrived, but has since stated that he would be very happy for her to care for him again”
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.