CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Redford Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines, staffing, recruitment and infection control were managed effectively, although some fire safety recommendations remained outstanding.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. The report says people and families were happy with the care and support.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. The report says people took part in reviews of their care and support.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home was consistently managed and leaders understood people's needs. However, some written records were not respectful or person-centred.
What inspectors found, July 2022
Redford Court is rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring support, but fire safety recommendations and poor wording in some records needed attention.
This was an unannounced inspection on 24 and 30 May 2022. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, staff and family members. They also reviewed care, medicine, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. People said they felt safe and were happy with the support. Staff knew people well, medicines were managed safely, and people received regular rehabilitation.
Inspectors found some areas to improve. Parts of an independent fire risk assessment were still outstanding. Some records used language that was not respectful or person-centred. The provider was asked to follow best practice on fire safety and review written records.
People felt safe
People and families told inspectors they felt safe in the home. Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff understood how to protect people from harm.
“They make me feel very welcome and safe” from the report
Safe medicines support
The home had systems to manage medicines safely. Where possible, people were supported to manage their own medicines.
“Effective systems were in place for the safe management of people's medicines.” from the report
Rehabilitation
People received regular rehabilitation from health professionals employed by the home. Inspectors heard that this support helped one person progress from using a wheelchair to walking.
“People benefitted from regular rehabilitation provided by a team of health care professionals employed at the service.” from the report
Involvement and reviews
People and families were involved in care planning and regular reviews. Meetings helped staff keep up to date with people's needs and wishes.
“People's views were sought and they were engaged and involved in planning their support.” from the report
Fire safety actions
needs fixingAn independent fire risk assessment identified improvements that were still outstanding. Inspectors recommended that the provider follow and continually monitor current best practice.
“A number of the recommendations were made in the report, some of these were completed. However, some remained outstanding.” from the report
Respectful record keeping
needs fixingSome care and incident records did not describe people respectfully or show that situations had been managed appropriately. The provider began work to improve staff awareness and coaching.
“In some written records people were not consistently written about in a respectful and dignified manner.” from the report
Storage of cleaning products
minorCleaning products in The Lodge were labelled and stored inappropriately. Senior staff dealt with this immediately.
“Cleaning products were seen inappropriately labelled and stored in 'The Lodge'.” from the report
- 01Have all actions from the February 2022 fire risk assessment now been completed?
- 02How do you continually check that fire safety arrangements follow current best practice?
- 03What training or coaching have staff received to ensure records are respectful, unbiased and non-judgemental?
- 04How are incident and de-escalation records checked to make sure they show that situations were managed appropriately?
- 05How can my relative take part in reviews of their care and health plans?
This was an inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; the other key question ratings were not inspected and carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 July 2022 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, January 2018
Redford Court is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a small gap in medicines fridge records.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 6 and 7 December 2017. Inspectors reviewed records, walked around the home, observed lunch and spoke with people, staff, managers and outside professionals.
The home supported 27 people and specialised in rehabilitation for people with an acquired brain injury. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, clean and well-maintained areas, suitable care plans and staff who treated people with respect.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The report says all five ratings remained Good, as they had been at the previous inspection on 10 December 2014.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff on duty, with senior staff and a manager available at all times. Recruitment checks and agency staff induction records were also in place.
“There were enough qualified and experienced staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe.” from the report
Personalised rehabilitation
Care files included people's support needs, choices and rehabilitation aims. Staff worked with therapists and supported people to take part in activities and the community.
“The care plans we looked at gave information about people's rehabilitation plans, support and care needs and how their needs were met.” from the report
Open management
Inspectors found an open and inclusive culture. People, relatives and staff could raise concerns and make suggestions through meetings and other feedback.
“There was a friendly, open and inclusive culture in the home and many of the people we met during our visits spoke highly of the staff and the managers.” from the report
Medicines fridge records
minorThere were gaps in the records of medicines room fridge temperatures. The manager said this would be discussed with staff and monitored closely.
“There were gaps in the medicines room fridge temperature records.” from the report
- 01How will you make sure medicines room fridge temperatures are recorded every day?
- 02What rehabilitation goals would you set for my relative, and how would their progress be reviewed?
- 03How would you support my relative's communication, decision-making and capacity needs?
- 04How many staff and senior staff would normally be on duty for the number and needs of people living here?
- 05How would my relative and our family raise a concern or complaint, and how would we be kept informed?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, the premises and the care provided; all five ratings remained Good from the 2014 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 January 2018 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 Redford Court
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 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 Liverpool
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 £1,260 a week. 83 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“All in all Kama b cared for the owner really well, every aspect of her care was of the highest standard.”
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.