CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Seven Springs - Care Home Physical Disabilities
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing and controlling infection. This included visiting, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed as a separate rated area in this targeted inspection, although inspectors noted infection control audits and monitoring.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and safe visiting arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 12 April 2021. It looked at how well the home was prepared to prevent and control COVID-19 infections.
Inspectors found good infection control practice. Visiting was controlled, social distancing was supported, staff used protective equipment correctly, and the home had enough protective equipment.
The home looked clean. Infection control policies were up to date, cleaning was monitored, and regular infection control checks were carried out.
The service was inspected but not rated. This visit did not provide an overall quality rating or ratings for most of the five areas.
Controlled visiting
Visits were arranged in advance, with testing and screening arrangements for contact visits. Other visits used a room with full-height screens, and outdoor visits were encouraged.
“Visiting was by appointment only with one designated person having a contact visit following a negative lateral flow test for COVID-19.” from the report
Protective equipment
The home had enough protective equipment for current and future demand. Staff were using it correctly during personal care.
“Staff were using PPE correctly and in accordance with government guidelines.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home looked clean. Cleaning schedules were in place and monitored.
“The home looked clean and there were cleaning schedules in place which were monitored by the housekeeper.” from the report
Regular checks
The home had up-to-date infection control policies and carried out monthly infection control audits. Actions were monitored until completion.
“Monthly infection control audits were done by the registered manager and actions were monitored by the regional management team to ensure completion.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visits arranged now, and what testing or screening is required?
- 02How much protective equipment is currently available, and how do you check that staff use it correctly?
- 03How often are infection control audits carried out now, and how are any actions followed up?
- 04What arrangements are in place if there is an infection outbreak?
- 05What are the home's current ratings or most recent inspection findings for caring, responsiveness and leadership?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated, and the other quality areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 May 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 2020
Seven Springs - Care Home Physical Disabilities is rated Good; inspectors found safe care and improved management, with some infection testing and medicines procedures needing attention.
Inspectors visited on 8 September 2020. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records. They also checked infection prevention measures because of coronavirus.
The home was rated Good overall. People and relatives said they felt safe, staff responded to call bells promptly, medicines were given as prescribed, and risks were generally managed well. The home was clean and staff used personal protective equipment as required.
The home had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection. Earlier breaches about safe care and treatment and good governance had been resolved, so the home was no longer in breach of those regulations.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only. The other areas were not inspected during this visit, and their previous ratings were used in calculating the overall rating.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe and knew who to speak to if they had concerns.
“People and their relatives told us they felt safe at the service and they knew who to speak with if they ever had concerns.” from the report
Staffing and call bells
Inspectors found staffing levels were suitable for people's needs and call bells were answered promptly.
“We observed staffing levels were appropriate to respond people's needs and call bells were answered in a timely manner.” from the report
Improved oversight
Management had introduced regular audits and equipment checks, helping them identify and act on problems.
“A range of audits were completed by the management team to monitor the quality of the service people received.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff described managers as approachable and said they could raise concerns.
“Overall the home is well managed, the managers have an open-door policy.” from the report
Instructions for some medicines
needs fixingWritten protocols were not in place for some medicines given only when needed. The manager started arrangements to put these in place during the inspection.
“However, protocols were not in place for staff to follow after going onto the computerised system.” from the report
Access to infection testing
needs fixingInspectors were not assured that testing was being accessed for people using the service and staff.
“We were not assured that the provider was accessing testing for people using the service and staff.” from the report
Specialist mattress checks
needs fixingOne mattress setting had not been changed after a person's weight decreased. Checks were changed from weekly to daily during the inspection.
“This was because one mattress setting was not changed following a decrease in a person's weight.” from the report
- 01What written protocols are now in place for medicines given only when needed?
- 02How do you access and record infection testing for people living here and staff?
- 03How are specialist mattress settings checked each day, and what happens if a setting is wrong?
- 04Which ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive came from the previous inspection?
- 05How do your audits show that the improvements since the previous inspection are being maintained?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 October 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.
Every inspection of Seven Springs - Care Home Physical Disabilities
5 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Seven Springs - Care Home Physical Disabilities →
- October 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Seven Springs - Care Home Physical Disabilities →
- May 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.