CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at St Andrews Drive
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staffing levels were flexible and medicines were managed safely, but inspectors advised more regular reviews of risk records.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had suitable training and support, and people received care based on detailed assessments. People were supported with food, health needs, communication and decision-making.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Staff were exceptionally caring, respectful and person-centred. People were supported to make choices, develop daily living skills and work towards greater independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and goals. People were supported to maintain relationships, follow interests, attend activities, go on holiday and use accessible information.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had committed leadership, regular audits and staff meetings. People and staff said they felt listened to and involved in how the home was run.
What inspectors found, September 2019
St Andrews Drive was rated Good overall, with Outstanding caring and some records needing more regular review.
Inspectors visited on 16 July 2019. One inspector spoke with three people and three staff, observed care, and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records. Some people could not explain their views verbally, so inspectors also observed how staff supported them.
The home supported six younger adults, including people who may have learning disabilities or autism. Inspectors found people were safe, staff were well trained, medicines were managed safely, and people were supported to make choices, build independence and take part in community activities.
Caring was rated Outstanding. Inspectors saw exceptionally kind and person-centred support. The other four areas were rated Good, meaning inspectors found a consistent standard of care, management and support, although they advised that some risk and care records should be reviewed more regularly.
Exceptional caring
Staff built strong relationships and provided compassionate, individual support. Inspectors saw examples of staff speaking up for people's health needs and helping them achieve personal goals.
“There were several examples of where staff had gone 'the extra mile' to provide exceptionally caring and compassionate support” from the report
Community involvement
People took part in many activities and were supported to maintain relationships, attend community events, access employment and go on holidays.
“People all went out and spent time in the community. Some people went out independently others were supported by staff.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
There were enough staff, and staffing could change according to people's needs. Staff only gave medicines after training and regular competency checks.
“Staff did not administer medicines until they had been trained to do so.” from the report
Risk records needed more frequent review
needs fixingInspectors said risk records were not always reviewed often enough to ensure they reflected people's current risks. The manager said this would be raised with the provider.
“We advised more regular evaluation should took place to ensure records accurately reflected current risk to people.” from the report
Care plan reviews
needs fixingInspectors discussed the need to evaluate care plans more regularly so that changes in people's needs were recorded accurately.
“We discussed that they should be evaluated more regularly to help ensure if people`s needs changed this was appropriately reflected in care records.” from the report
Renewing DBS checks
minorA system for renewing staff background checks after the first check was not in place. The issue was discussed with the human resources team and action was taken immediately.
“A system to renew DBS checks, after the initial check, was not in place to ensure people were still suitable to be employed.” from the report
- 01How often are each person's risk assessments now reviewed and updated?
- 02How often are care plans evaluated, and how are changes in people's needs recorded?
- 03How are staff background checks renewed after the first DBS check?
- 04Which communication tools are available for a person who does not communicate verbally?
- 05How would you support someone who wanted to develop daily living skills or move to more independent accommodation?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC areas, including the care provided and the home itself. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 September 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.
What inspectors found, January 2017
St Andrews Drive was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised support for six younger adults with learning disabilities.
This was an announced, comprehensive inspection on 01 December 2016. The inspector spoke with five people living in the home, staff, managers and three relatives. They also observed care and checked support, staffing, training, medicines and management records.
The inspectors found that people were safe and that there were enough staff. Medicines were managed reliably. Staff had the training and knowledge needed to support people, and people received help with food, drink and healthcare.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff supported privacy, choice, independence, hobbies and contact with relatives. Support plans reflected people's wishes, and there was a complaints process.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The report does not identify any breaches of regulations.
Safe staffing and medicines
The report found enough staff to meet people's needs, with all planned shifts filled in the week before inspection. Staff were trained to support people with their medicines.
“People told us that there were enough staff on duty to provide them with all of the support they needed and we saw people being given all of the individual assistance they needed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff being friendly, patient and discreet. People had private bedrooms and staff respected their personal space.
“We saw that people were being treated with respect and kindness. Staff were friendly, patient and discreet when supporting people.” from the report
Activities and community life
People were supported to take part in chosen hobbies, social events, holidays and community activities.
“Records showed and our observations confirmed that each person was being supported to enjoy a range of activities that they had chosen.” from the report
Good oversight
The home carried out regular checks on care, medicines, legal rights, fire safety, hot water, radiators and food handling.
“We found that suitable arrangements were in place to enable the registered persons to robustly monitor and evaluate the quality of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you adapt communication and support for my relative's particular needs?
- 02How will you help my relative develop independence while keeping them safe?
- 03What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative?
- 04How would you support my relative with medicines and healthcare appointments?
- 05How can my relative or our family raise a concern or make a complaint?
This was an announced inspection of all five areas, involving conversations with people and relatives, observations of support, and checks of care and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 January 2017 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 St Andrews Drive
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 November 2010.
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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Lincolnshire
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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.