CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at St. Augustine's House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. The home had safeguarding procedures, risk assessments, suitable staffing and recruitment checks, and medicines were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People’s physical, mental and social needs were assessed. Staff were trained and supported, and people were helped with food, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw staff treating people with dignity, respecting their privacy and supporting their independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed, current and based on people’s needs, wishes and preferences. People had some activities and support to maintain relationships, but wanted a wider range of activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found effective systems for checking quality and making improvements. People, relatives and staff were encouraged to give feedback, and the home worked with other professionals.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with people asking for a wider range of activities.
This was the home’s first CQC inspection. It was unannounced and took place on 17 July 2019. The inspector spoke with people, staff, the manager, relatives and health and social care professionals. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable safeguarding procedures, risk assessments, staffing, recruitment checks and medicines systems. They also found that staff were trained and supported, and that people’s care plans were detailed and personalised.
People said staff were kind, respected their privacy and supported their choices. Families were welcomed and complaints systems were in place. People said they enjoyed some activities but wanted more variety, and the manager agreed to review the activities programme.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe with staff. Inspectors found safeguarding training, clear procedures and risk assessments to help reduce avoidable harm.
“People told us they felt safe living in this home and that staff were kind to them.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as caring and supportive. Inspectors observed warm relationships and respectful help with eating and daily care.
“We observed staff interacting with people in the communal areas and saw they had good relationships and staff were warm towards people.” from the report
Personalised care plans
Care plans reflected people’s needs, preferences and communication methods. They were described as up to date and reliable for staff to follow.
“People's care plans were sufficiently detailed and reflected the care people said they wanted.” from the report
Good management checks
The home had systems to monitor care, review incidents and act on areas for improvement. Staff also received training, supervision and appraisals.
“Quality assurance systems helped to ensure areas for improvement were identified and action taken to continuously improve the quality of the service provided.” from the report
Limited activity choice
minorPeople enjoyed some activities but said they wanted a wider range. The manager agreed to discuss this with people and staff and review the programme.
“People said there were some activities that they enjoyed participating in but they told us they would like the range of activities to be expanded.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the activities programme since people asked for a wider range?
- 02How do you make sure each person’s care plan remains up to date and reflects their current wishes?
- 03How are medicines checked after staff complete their training?
- 04How can relatives give feedback, and how will they be told about changes made in response?
- 05How do you review risks and make sure staff follow the guidance in people’s care plans?
This was the first unannounced inspection and covered all five CQC questions: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 August 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 St. Augustine's House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 July 2018.
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 Croydon
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. 77 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”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.