CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Poppy Place
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm. Inspectors found risk assessments, safe medicines systems, suitable staffing, infection control and emergency plans.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant induction, training and support. People's dietary, healthcare and communication needs were assessed, and staff were working within the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They were involved in decisions about their care and supported to keep relationships with family and friends.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's individual needs, preferences and interests. People were offered personalised activities and information in suitable formats.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team was described as approachable and focused on improving people's lives. Audits, feedback and action plans were used to monitor and improve care.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rated Good in every area; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with no breaches reported.
This was an unannounced inspection on 16 July 2019. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, staff and the management team. The inspector also spoke with a relative and checked care plans, medicine records, complaints and quality checks.
People were found to be safe. Staff understood people's risks, medicines were managed safely and the home was clean. Staffing levels were judged sufficient, and staff had the training and support needed for their roles.
The report describes kind and respectful care. People were involved in decisions, supported to follow their interests and helped to maintain relationships. Care plans were detailed and regularly updated.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found the service consistently met the expected standard at the time of this inspection.
Safe care and staffing
Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, medicines were handled safely and there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
“Throughout our inspection visit we saw people's needs were met in a timely way. Staff were not rushed and had time to spend with people.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
Staff used a warm and friendly approach. People were supported with privacy, dignity, choice and independence.
“The staff are very kind, considerate and caring.” from the report
Good activities and relationships
People chose how to spend their time and were supported with individual activities, outings, hobbies and contact with family and friends.
“Activities took place with individuals, based on their personal preferences, each day.” from the report
Strong management and improvement
The management team was approachable and used audits, feedback and action plans to monitor care and make improvements.
“The audits and action plan helped the provider to monitor and improve care for the people using the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and manage my relative's individual risks, including any risk of anxiety or choking?
- 02What training and experience do staff have in supporting my relative's specific needs?
- 03How would my relative be involved in decisions about their care if they communicate in a different way or cannot make a particular decision?
- 04What activities and community opportunities could be offered to match my relative's interests?
- 05How would you keep our family informed and respond if we raised a concern or complaint?
This inspection looked at the care home, the premises and all five CQC questions; all five ratings continued as Good from the previous comprehensive inspection in February 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 August 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, February 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some medicines recording and storage checks to improve.
The inspection took place on 5 and 7 December 2016. The first day was unannounced. This was the home’s first inspection since it registered in January 2016.
Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, health professionals, managers and care staff. They observed care, reviewed three people’s support plans and daily records, and checked medicines, recruitment, complaints and quality records.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. The home supported up to seven adults and seven people were living there. Inspectors found personalised care, suitable staffing, meaningful activities and good involvement in decisions.
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people’s individual needs, preferences and personal histories. Staff supported people to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“Care was person centred and was planned to meet people's individual needs, abilities and preferences to improve the quality of their lives.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People, relatives and health professionals gave positive feedback about staff. Inspectors saw staff listening, communicating appropriately and protecting people’s dignity.
“Staff were compassionate and supported people according to their individual needs.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People were supported to take part in activities they enjoyed, including holidays, crafts, baking, local outings and community events.
“People had fulfilling lives because they were engaged in activities that were meaningful to them.” from the report
Strong involvement and communication
People and their representatives were involved in care planning and reviews. Staff shared information effectively and responded to changes in people’s needs.
“People and their representatives were involved in planning and decisions about their care and support needs.” from the report
Medicine records
needs fixingThere had been three medicine errors in the previous 12 months because of gaps in recording on medicine administration records. These had been investigated and staff received additional support.
“The deputy manager told us there had been three medicine errors in the last 12 months, where there had been gaps in recording on MAR sheets.” from the report
Medicine room temperature
needs fixingThe temperature of the medicine room was not being monitored. The manager said this would be measured in future so medicines could be stored safely.
“We found that the temperature in the medicine room was not being monitored.” from the report
- 01How do you now monitor the temperature in the medicine room, and where are the checks recorded?
- 02What changes were made after the three medicine recording errors?
- 03How will you make sure there are no gaps on medicine administration records?
- 04How will my relative be involved in reviewing and changing their support plan?
- 05What activities and community visits could be arranged around my relative’s preferences and needs?
This was the home’s first inspection and covered the overall quality of the service across all five questions, with observations, discussions and checks of care and operational records. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 February 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 Poppy Place
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 January 2016.
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 Warwickshire
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. 77 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.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.