CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Safeharbour (260 Hagley Road)
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear risk assessments, enough staff, recruitment checks and trained staff for medicines and safeguarding. The home also had infection control arrangements and systems to learn from accidents and incidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and preferences were assessed, and staff had suitable training and support. Inspectors found that nutrition, healthcare, communication with professionals and legal requirements around restrictions were managed appropriately.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were found to be kind and compassionate. People were supported to make choices and to maintain their privacy, dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, interests and preferences. Relatives were involved in reviews, different communication methods were used, and a complaints process was available.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open, inclusive culture and regular checks and audits. This rating improved from Requires Improvement because the provider had shown that its quality systems were being used consistently.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Safeharbour (260 Hagley Road) was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and well-organised support, with clear improvement since the previous inspection.
This was a planned comprehensive inspection on 23 and 24 January 2020. One inspector reviewed care and medicine records, staff recruitment and training records, and the systems used to manage the home. They also spoke with relatives, staff and the registered manager.
The home supported four people with learning disabilities. Inspectors rated all five areas Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. They found suitable staffing and recruitment checks, safe medicines support, person-centred care, support with health needs, and systems for complaints and quality checks.
The home had previously been rated Requires Improvement. The overall rating is now Good. The well-led rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good because the provider had shown that its monitoring and quality systems were working consistently.
Choice and independence
Support was organised around people's choices, control and independence. Inspectors found that people were encouraged to gain skills and live as fully as possible.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Kind staff
Inspectors found staff to be caring and compassionate. Relatives also described staff positively.
“Staff were kind, caring and compassionate toward people.” from the report
Safe support
The home had arrangements for safeguarding, risk management, staffing, medicines and infection control. Relatives reported no concerns about safety or medicines.
“People received support that was safe.” from the report
Improved leadership
The provider had strengthened its oversight since the previous inspection. Regular audits, spot checks and staff involvement were being used to monitor care.
“At this inspection we found the provider had sustained the consistency.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you find out and record my relative's views if they cannot verbally communicate?
- 02How will you support my relative to develop skills and remain as independent as possible?
- 03Which communication methods, such as pictures or gestures, work best for my relative?
- 04How often will you involve our family in care plan reviews and decisions about support?
- 05What activities and community opportunities would be available to match my relative's interests?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions; inspectors could not speak directly with people because they were unable to verbally communicate their views. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 February 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.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found good safe, effective, caring and responsive support, but the home needed to embed improvements in its management.
This was an unannounced inspection on 14 and 15 November 2018. One inspector reviewed care and medicines records, audits, staff files, training, complaints, incidents and safeguarding information. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff, the manager and the provider.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found that people were safer, received their medicines as prescribed, had access to healthcare and were routinely offered choices. Staff were described as kind and respectful, and people were supported to take part in activities they enjoyed.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Well-led, so the overall rating was Requires Improvement. A new manager was in post but was not yet registered with the CQC. Inspectors found better systems and oversight, but said the improvements still needed to be embedded and shown to last.
The service had previously been rated Inadequate and had been in Special Measures. It was no longer Inadequate and had left Special Measures after this inspection. The previous concerns about consent, healthcare, protection from harm and oversight had improved.
Safer care
Staff understood people's risks and knew how to respond to safeguarding concerns. Recruitment checks and medicines processes were also in place.
“Staff were aware of their responsibilities to protect people from harm and knew what action to take if someone had suffered an injury or if they had concerns they were at risk of abuse.” from the report
Choice and control
People were routinely involved in decisions about their daily lives. Inspectors found clear improvement from the previous inspection.
“People were routinely supported to make decisions throughout their day and offered choices.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors observed warm interactions between staff and people. Relatives also spoke positively about the caring approach.
“We observed a number of caring interactions between all staff and people living at the service.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People were offered activities based on their interests and preferences, both inside and outside the home. Staff were continuing to look for new activities.
“There was no doubt that people were offered a choice of activities that were of interest to them and we saw evidence of this.” from the report
Improved teamwork
Staff had introduced audits, action plans and meetings to monitor the service. Staff and relatives reported that communication and morale had improved.
“Staff were actively involved in the development of the service.” from the report
Manager registration
needs fixingA manager was in post but had not yet registered with the CQC. The report says they were applying to become the registered manager.
“A manager was in post but they were not currently registered with the Commission.” from the report
- 01Has the manager now become registered with the CQC, and who is responsible for the home if not?
- 02How do you check that the new care, medicines and safeguarding systems continue to work over time?
- 03What activities are currently available that match my relative's interests and communication needs?
- 04How are changes in a person's health or behaviour recorded and shared with all staff?
- 05How can relatives raise concerns, and how quickly will they receive a response?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, the care provided and the accommodation, with records reviewed for all four people living at the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 July 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 Safeharbour (260 Hagley Road)
5 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2020Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Safeharbour (260 Hagley Road) →
- July 2019Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Safeharbour (260 Hagley Road) →
- July 2019Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- December 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 January 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 Dudley
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 £1,230 a week. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
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.