CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sahara Gardens
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection-control arrangements during this targeted COVID-19 inspection.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 15 March 2021. It focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than the full range of care quality questions.
Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, followed social distancing and shielding guidance, carried out testing, and kept the premises clean. They also found suitable arrangements for visitors and for preventing or managing outbreaks.
The home supported people to keep in touch with family and friends. It also used different communication methods and created activities to help people continue interests during the pandemic.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall rating or ratings for most areas of care.
Clean premises and PPE
The premises were clean and maintained, with hand sanitiser and PPE available at the entrance.
“The premises were clean and well maintained. Hand sanitiser and personal protective equipment (PPE) were available at the entrance of the home.” from the report
COVID-19 testing
The provider had arrangements for regular COVID-19 testing of people living at the home and staff.
“The provider had appropriate arrangements to test people and staff for COVID-19 and was following government guidance on testing.” from the report
Staff infection-control training
Staff had regular training in infection control and using PPE.
“All staff had received regular training on infection control and the use of PPE.” from the report
Family contact
People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends by phone, video messaging and visits.
“The provider had ensured people using the service could maintain links with family members and friends.” from the report
Communication and activities
The home used different ways to communicate with people and created activities linked to their interests during the pandemic.
“The provider understood the communication needs of people. For example, the provider used various forms of communication with people such as using objects of reference.” from the report
Further development identified
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its infection-control approach. The report does not explain what specific improvement was needed.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01How have your infection prevention and control arrangements changed since the inspection on 15 March 2021?
- 02How often are people living here and staff tested for COVID-19 or other infections now?
- 03How do you currently support visits and contact with family and friends?
- 04What communication methods do you use for people who communicate with objects of reference or in other ways?
- 05What action did you take after CQC signposted resources to develop your infection-control approach?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 March 2021 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, May 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support, with one pain medicine record issue corrected the same day.
This was an unannounced inspection over three days in January 2018. One inspector spoke with people, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. They observed care and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
The home supported four people at the inspection, in a service registered for five adults with learning disabilities and autism. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness and involved in decisions about their care. Staff supported independence, communication, health needs, relationships and activities chosen by each person.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. One pain medicine record was not specific about the dose, but the home contacted the pharmacy and GP and corrected this by the end of the day. The overall rating was unchanged from the previous inspection in July 2015.
Personalised goals
Care plans recorded people's preferences and aspirations. Staff helped people build independence, including travelling, shopping and managing money.
“Care plans were very detailed, pictorial and contained individual aspirations.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw staff respond promptly and patiently to people. Relatives described the care as very caring.
“People were relaxed in the presence of staff and other people who used the service.” from the report
Activities and independence
People took part in varied activities at home and in the community. These included practical skills, cultural events, animal care and social activities.
“There was a wide variety of activities offered in accordance with people's wishes.” from the report
Staff support and oversight
Staff received regular training and supervision. Managers used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor the service and make changes.
“The provider had various robust quality audit systems to ensure high quality care was delivered.” from the report
Pain medicine directions
needs fixingOne record for an as-needed pain medicine did not state the dose clearly on the medicine chart and prescription label. The home acted immediately and resolved it the same day.
“We found one issue with a PRN medicine for pain where the MAR charts and prescription label were not dosage specific.” from the report
Night-time checks
needs fixingA spot check found no movement in the corridors, raising concern that night staff might not have been following people's care plans. The home investigated, took performance action and increased checks and staff support.
“This was a concern because it indicated that people were not receiving care in line with their care plan during the night” from the report
- 01What checks are now used to make sure as-needed pain medicines have clear, dose-specific instructions?
- 02What changes were made to night staffing, checks and supervision after the concern about night-time care?
- 03Was the planned refurbishment and new kitchen completed, and how were people involved in the final decisions?
- 04How will you support my relative's individual goals, communication needs and cultural or religious choices?
- 05How will my family receive updates about my relative's wellbeing, activities and achievements?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions; the previous overall rating in July 2015 was Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 May 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 Sahara Gardens
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 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 Newham
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 £1,190 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She is a safe pair of hands and her years of experience certainly shine through.”
“Sidonia is a first class live-in carer whose dedication and thoughtfulness made her stay a happy experience.”
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.