CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Shooters Hill Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and risks were assessed. Medicines, accidents, infection control, staffing and recruitment were all managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before moving in. Staff received induction, training and supervision, and people had support with food, drink and healthcare.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were described as kind and caring. Inspectors found that people's privacy, dignity, choices and independence were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were reviewed and reflected people's needs, preferences and goals. People knew how to complain, and complaints had been logged, investigated and resolved.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The home's quality systems were generally in place, but they had not identified that fire risk assessments were not being carried out or reviewed by an expert or competent person.
What inspectors found, January 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind care, but the home needed to improve its fire risk assessment and leadership checks.
This was an unannounced inspection on 6 November 2018. One inspector spoke with two people using the home, a care worker and the two registered managers. The inspector also reviewed care records, staff files, training records, audits, incidents and policies.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, medicines were managed safely, staff were trained, and there were enough staff. People were supported to make choices, stay independent, access healthcare and take part in activities.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. The home had not arranged for a professional or competent person to carry out or review its fire risk assessment. During the inspection, the managers commissioned a professional fire risk assessor. The overall rating remained Good, but the leadership shortfall means improvements were needed.
Kind and respectful staff
People said staff were kind and caring. Inspectors saw staff acting calmly and respectfully and supporting people's privacy and dignity.
“We saw staff interacting with people in a patient, respectful and calm manner.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's routines, histories, preferences and goals. People were involved in planning their support and were encouraged to remain independent.
“Support plans included information about people's life histories, hobbies, choices and preferences as well as information about the things that were important to them.” from the report
Activities and community links
People had individual activity planners. Activities included college, cinema trips, eating out, shopping, gardening and arts and crafts.
“People had individual, person-centred weekly activity planners.” from the report
Fire risk assessment
seriousThe home had not had a fire risk assessment carried out by a professional fire risk assessor. The managers accepted they did not have the necessary skills, so a professional assessment was commissioned during the inspection.
“The home had never had a fire risk assessment carried out by a professional fire risk assessor” from the report
- 01What did the professional fire risk assessment commissioned in November 2018 find?
- 02Have all actions from that fire risk assessment been completed, and how are they now checked?
- 03How often are fire safety arrangements reviewed by a suitably competent person?
- 04How will you make sure your quality audits identify important safety issues in future?
- 05What activities and support would be available for my relative's mental health needs and personal goals?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including the premises and care provided; the inspector spoke with two people and reviewed records for all five people living at the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 January 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 Shooters Hill Residential Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Shooters Hill Residential Home →
- July 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 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 Greenwich
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. 87 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
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.