CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rons Place
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and there were enough trained and experienced staff to meet their needs. Some risk assessments were out of date, and records did not always show how lessons were learned from incidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had induction, training and supervision, and people received support with food, health appointments and decision-making. Staff had limited understanding of the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, although inspectors observed staff seeking consent.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, respectful and supportive. People were encouraged to make choices, maintain independence and keep important relationships.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and staff responded when people's needs changed. Some care plans did not clearly record the outcomes people wanted to achieve.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- People, relatives and most staff felt supported and said the home was well run. However, quality checks, training records, care plan reviews and action plans were not consistently effective.
What inspectors found, December 2017
Rons Place was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, but the home was not consistently well-led.
This was a comprehensive, unannounced inspection on 02 November 2017. The inspector spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines, training, incidents and quality checks.
People were safe and cared for by kind, experienced staff. Medicines were managed safely. People were supported to make choices, stay independent, maintain relationships and take part in activities they enjoyed. Food and support with health needs were also seen as effective.
The main weakness was management oversight. Audits and checks were not always completed, records were not always accurate or up to date, and one safeguarding concern had not been reported to the local authority. The overall rating stayed Good, but Well-led changed from Good at the previous inspection to Requires Improvement.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices about their care and to live as independently as possible.
“People received care that enabled them to live their lives as they wanted, and were able to make choices about maintaining their independence.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, given and managed safely and as prescribed.
“Medicines were managed, stored and administered safely, in accordance with best practice guidance.” from the report
Kind atmosphere
Inspectors saw a calm home where staff spoke respectfully and people responded positively to them.
“There was a calm and relaxed atmosphere in the home.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans contained detailed information about people's needs, preferences and backgrounds. Staff responded when people's needs changed.
“Care plans contained personalised information to help staff respond to people's needs as effectively as possible.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to keep in touch with important people and to enjoy hobbies and activities they chose.
“People were supported to maintain any hobbies or activities they enjoyed, and we saw people went out according to their preferences throughout the day during our inspection visit.” from the report
Weak quality checks
needs fixingAudits did not always give managers the information needed to improve the service. Feedback action plans had no named owners, timescales or clear tracking.
“Quality checks and audits did not give the provider the information needed to ensure the support people received was effective.” from the report
Out-of-date records
needs fixingSome risk assessments and care records had not been reviewed when needed. Training records also did not give a complete picture of staff training.
“Some risk assessments had not been updated as required by the provider's policy and procedure.” from the report
Safeguarding reporting
needs fixingOne safeguarding concern was dealt with to keep people safe, but it was not reported to the local authority as required by the home's procedures.
“The provider had not notified the local authority.” from the report
- 01How have you made sure all risk assessments and care plans are now reviewed and kept up to date?
- 02How do you now record and check all staff training, including training about learning disabilities, challenging behaviour, mental health and anxiety?
- 03What system is used to make sure safeguarding concerns are reported to the local authority when required?
- 04How often are infection control, care quality and safety audits completed, and who checks that actions are finished?
- 05How do you ensure there are enough staff to support people safely when they want to go out?
This was a comprehensive, unannounced inspection covering all five key questions; the overall rating remained Good, while Well-led changed from Good to Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 December 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 Rons Place
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2017Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 September 2011.
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 Solihull
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. 9 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.