CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Southwell Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors checked staffing, medicines and infection control. They found enough trained staff, safe medicines procedures and infection control arrangements, but did not review the full Safe question.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, December 2021
Inspected but not rated; the previous overall rating was Good, and inspectors found no evidence of harm from staffing or medicines concerns.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 23 November 2021. Inspectors checked specific concerns about staffing levels and medicines, and also looked at infection prevention and control.
Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff to meet people's needs. People said staff usually came promptly, although staff were busier at some times of day. Medicines were administered, stored and disposed of safely, with checks to monitor this.
The home had infection control arrangements in place, including the safe use of personal protective equipment and arrangements for testing and visits. Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from the concerns that prompted the inspection.
This inspection did not give a new overall rating. The previous overall rating was Good and remained unchanged. The Safe question was inspected but not rated, and the other questions were not reviewed.
Staffing
Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff to meet people's care and support needs. Staffing was based on individual needs, with agency staff used when needed.
“There were enough suitably trained staff to meet people's care and support requirements.” from the report
Medicines
Staff were trained and had their competence checked. Medicines were administered, stored and disposed of safely, with audits in place.
“Staff administered, stored and disposed of people's medicines safely.” from the report
Infection control
The home had arrangements for personal protective equipment, testing, hygiene, social distancing and managing possible outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Visiting
People told inspectors that friends and relatives were able to visit, in line with the guidance at the time.
“People also confirmed their friends and relatives were able to visit them.” from the report
Busy times
minorPeople said staff were busier at some times of day. They said they did not have to wait too long for help, but this is worth discussing if your relative needs support at particular times.
“They told us there were times of the day when staff were busier, but confirmed they never had to wait too long for assistance.” from the report
Registered manager
minorThe report says there was no manager registered with the CQC at the time of the inspection. It says the provider was legally responsible for how the home was run and for care quality and safety.
“The service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure there are enough staff during the times of day when the home is busiest?
- 02What medicines audits have been completed since this inspection, and have they found any problems?
- 03Who is currently managing the home, and what arrangements are in place while there is no CQC-registered manager?
- 04How do you keep infection control arrangements up to date and manage a possible outbreak?
- 05How are visits organised if infection control guidance changes?
This was a targeted inspection of specific staffing and medicines concerns, with infection control also reviewed; the full Safe rating and the other key-question ratings were not reviewed and the previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 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, April 2021
Rated Good in every area; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with a recent medicines error dealt with promptly.
Inspectors visited unannounced on 18 February and 10 March 2021. They spoke with people, relatives, managers and staff. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, recruitment checks and health-monitoring records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and were happy with the care. Relatives were also very satisfied.
Inspectors found staff were kind, reliable and knew people well. Medicines, infection control, staffing, risk management and the building were generally managed safely. A recent medicines error was identified, and the management team acted to reduce the risk of it happening again.
This was the first inspection since the service registered in 2019. A Good rating means the inspectors found the service was meeting the relevant standards at the time of the inspection. It does not mean that every part of care was perfect.
Personalised care
Inspectors found that staff knew people well and provided care that reflected their choices, needs and preferences.
“People living at Southwell Court were provided with good, personalised care by staff who were kind, compassionate, easy to talk to and reliable.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives described staff positively. Staff supported privacy, dignity, independence and involvement in decisions.
“People and relatives used words such as kind, compassionate, caring, lovely, easy to talk to, approachable and reliable to describe the staff.” from the report
Safety and infection control
Inspectors found risk assessments, staffing, building checks, medicines arrangements and COVID-19 infection control measures in place.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Open management
The management team was described as approachable and accessible. People, relatives and staff were asked for their views and suggestions.
“The provider had a robust auditing system in place, with auditing and monitoring of all aspects of the service being carried out by the manager, regional manager and other staff from the provider's head office.” from the report
Recent medicines error
needs fixingInspectors found a very recent error involving medicines. The managers acted immediately and later provided information showing that new procedures had been put in place.
“We found a very recent error. The manager and regional manager acted immediately to minimise the risk of the error happening again.” from the report
Corridor handrails
minorInspectors asked the provider to consider whether handrails would improve people's safety in the corridors.
“We asked the provider to consider whether handrails in the corridors would improve people's safety.” from the report
Activities and visiting
minorActivities and contact with visitors had been more limited during the pandemic. Staff used other ways to help people keep in touch, but people were looking forward to more activities and visitors.
“This had been more difficult during the last year, but staff did their best to keep people occupied.” from the report
- 01What exactly was the recent medicines error, and what checks are now used to prevent a repeat?
- 02Have corridor handrails been installed or otherwise provided since the inspection?
- 03What activities are now available for residents who want to take part?
- 04How can residents keep in regular contact with family and friends?
- 05Who is currently the registered manager, and what is the current progress of the manager's registration application?
This was a planned first inspection of the newly registered care home and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 April 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.
Every inspection of Southwell Court
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- December 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2021GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 May 2019.
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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Cambridgeshire
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 £1,020 to £1,200 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
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.