CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sahara Parkside
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, December 2021
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, but leadership and the home’s large campus-style setting needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 26 October 2021. One inspector reviewed records, three care plans, medicines, staffing, infection control and quality checks. They spoke with one person, staff, relatives and managers, and observed care where people could not speak with them.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, medicines were stored safely, staff were trained, care was personalised and people were supported with relationships, activities, food and healthcare.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. The home had no CQC-registered manager, and there had not been a permanent long-term registered manager for over two years. The building was also not fully in line with guidance because it was a large, campus-style setting. The overall rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
Safer medicines
Medicines were kept in individual refrigerators set to a safe temperature. Staff were trained, and administration records were checked daily.
“Medicines for each person were stored safely in their own individual refrigerators, which were set to a temperature range.” from the report
Respect and dignity
Inspectors saw staff being patient and understanding. People’s privacy, dignity, equality and personal choices were respected.
“We observed staff to be patient and understanding of people. People were relaxed in staff's company and felt comfortable speaking with them.” from the report
Activities and community links
People had structured activities in the day centre and were supported to pursue interests, attend college and go into the community.
“The activities were based on what people enjoyed doing and these included sensory sessions, arts and crafts, music therapy and chair exercises.” from the report
Improved quality checks
The home had introduced regular checks covering medicines, care plans, records, infection control, staff training and the building.
“Weekly and monthly audits and checks were carried out on medicine records, care plans, daily records, infection control procedures, accident and incident records, staff training and the physical environment” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThe home had no manager registered with the CQC. Inspectors were concerned that the manager had been in post for more than six months without submitting an application, and that there had been no permanent long-term registered manager for over two years.
“There had not been a permanent long-term registered manager in the home for over two years, to ensure there was consistent leadership.” from the report
Large campus-style setting
needs fixingThe building contained ten flats on one site and was considered a campus-style environment. Inspectors said this did not fully meet the relevant principles for people with learning disabilities and autism.
“The physical setting did not meet the principles because it was a large apartment building for up to 30 people, with offices for staff located on the ground floor, and thus a campus style environment.” from the report
- 01Has the manager’s application to register with the CQC now been submitted and approved?
- 02What arrangements are in place to provide consistent leadership while the registration position is resolved?
- 03What changes are being made so the ten flats operate as smaller individual services rather than one large campus-style home?
- 04How are people and their families involved in planning and checking the proposed changes to the building?
- 05How will the home show that its care continues to follow the Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture principles?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control; the inspection included one person’s direct feedback, observations and records, with further feedback from two relatives after the visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 December 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, October 2019
Sahara Parkside is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, person-centred care but repeated safety and management shortfalls.
This was an unannounced inspection by two inspectors. They spoke with people living at the home, staff, managers and relatives. They reviewed care plans, risk assessments, staff records, medicines records and quality checks.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe and Well-led were also Requires Improvement. Inspectors found problems with medicine temperature checks, some risk assessments, cleanliness and the way audits identified and fixed problems.
Effective, Caring and Responsive were rated Good. People received kind care, had choices, were supported to be independent, and took part in activities. The home had improved in several areas since the previous inspection, including food, staff supervision, care plans and activity records.
The home had already been rated Requires Improvement at the previous inspection, so this was the second consecutive rating at that level. CQC said it would monitor progress and return under its re-inspection programme.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors found staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff also supported people to make choices and develop their independence.
“We observed that staff had a good relationship with people and treated people in a kind and caring manner.” from the report
Improved staff support
Regular supervision and appraisals had been carried out. Staff had completed mandatory and specialist training relevant to people's needs.
“Staff had completed mandatory training and refresher courses to perform their roles effectively such as first aid, safeguarding and moving and handling.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans described people's support needs, routines, communication needs and preferences. Reviews were carried out regularly.
“Care plans were person centred and detailed people's support needs accurately.” from the report
Activities and community involvement
People were supported to take part in activities inside and outside the home, including activities linked to their interests and local community.
“A weekly activities plan was in place that ranged from outdoor and indoor activities with access to communities to ensure people were protected from isolation.” from the report
Food and choice
The home had improved the availability of food and drink in people's apartments. People had choices and took part in menu planning, with religious dietary needs considered.
“People had choices with meals and were involved with menu planning.” from the report
Medicine storage temperatures
seriousMedicine storage temperatures went beyond recommended levels on several occasions. There were no records showing what action had been taken, creating a risk that medicines might not work as intended.
“However, we found that temperature levels of where medicine where stored, went beyond recommended levels on a number of occasions.” from the report
Incomplete behaviour risk assessments
seriousSome risk assessments did not contain enough detail about how to reduce or respond to behaviour that may challenge. Inspectors recommended that the home follow best practice guidance.
“During this inspection, we still found inconsistencies with risk assessments for people that may demonstrate behaviours that challenged.” from the report
Cleanliness and infection control
seriousSome apartments had dirt build-up, a stained carpet and peeling flooring. Inspectors said this increased the risk of infection spreading.
“Adequate systems were not in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection, although staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities in this area.” from the report
Weak quality checks
needs fixingAudits had increased but were not strong enough to find and resolve repeated problems. Care plan audits had not been completed since April 2019.
“Although frequency of some audits had been increased, we found there were repeated concerns with medicine temperature recordings and risk assessments.” from the report
Management arrangements
needs fixingThe usual manager was on long-term sick leave, a temporary manager could not extend their contract, and a manager was not registered with CQC at the time of the inspection.
“A manager had not been registered with the CQC but we were informed once a new temporary manager was in place they would apply to register with the CQC.” from the report
- 01How are medicine temperatures in people's apartments checked now, and what happens when they go outside the recommended range?
- 02Have all behaviour-related risk assessments been updated with clear de-escalation techniques for each person?
- 03What work has been completed to remove dirt, replace the stained carpet and repair the peeling kitchen flooring?
- 04How do managers now check that audits identify problems and that actions are completed promptly?
- 05Has a registered manager been appointed and registered with CQC since this inspection?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including both the care provided and the home's premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 October 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 Sahara Parkside
6 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2021Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2018Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 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 Barking and Dagenham
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. 79 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“She is a safe pair of hands and her years of experience certainly shine through.”
“Charity would take Nan on holidays day trips and shopping adventures”
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.