CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at St Mary's Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Medicines, safeguarding, risk assessments, staffing and recruitment were found to be managed safely. The home was clean and had systems for reviewing accidents and incidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received support from health professionals when needed and staff understood their health needs. Staff had regular training and supervision, and people were supported with food, drink and legal decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, compassionate and respectful. People were supported to express their views, make choices, maintain privacy and build independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans, communication methods and activity plans were personalised. People were supported with community activities, work or volunteering, complaints and end-of-life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open, person-centred culture and systems for checking quality and safety. Staff understood their roles and managers used audits, meetings and reviews to improve care.
What inspectors found, June 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, although the overall rating fell from Outstanding.
The inspection took place on 7 and 21 February 2020. It was unannounced on the first day and announced on the second. One inspector observed care, spoke with two people and three staff, and reviewed care records for three people.
The home supports three people with learning disabilities and/or autism and can support up to four. Inspectors rated all five areas Good. They found kind staff, safe medicines practices, enough staff, good training, personalised care and strong support for people's choices, communication and independence.
The overall rating is Good. The report says this means people's outcomes were consistently good, and that the home was consistently managed and well-led. The previous overall rating, published in 2017, was Outstanding.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors found that staff understood people well and treated them with empathy, dignity and respect.
“People received care and support from staff who were kind, empathetic and respectful.” from the report
Personalised communication
The home used different methods to help people understand information, express their views and make decisions.
“Staff used different methods to support people to express their views and make choices about their care, depending on how people communicated and what worked best for them.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
People received medicines as prescribed, and inspectors found enough staff to support activities and appointments. The staff team was described as consistent and stable.
“People were cared for by a consistent and stable staff team who knew people well.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were encouraged to take part in activities, use community facilities and develop greater independence.
“People were encouraged to live full and active lives and achieve their goals.” from the report
Ratings fell from Outstanding
minorThe overall rating fell from Outstanding at the previous inspection to Good. Caring and Well-led also fell from Outstanding to Good, although inspectors still found both areas to be good.
“At the last inspection this key question was rated as outstanding. At this inspection this key question has been rated good.” from the report
- 01The previous rating was Outstanding. What has the home done, or plans to do, to improve the Caring and Well-led ratings?
- 02How will staff continue to use each person's individual communication profile and preferred ways of communicating?
- 03How many staff will normally be on duty, and how will the home maintain the stable staff team?
- 04How are people involved in reviewing their care plans, activity planners and end-of-life wishes?
- 05How does the home check that medicines audits and risk assessments remain accurate and up to date?
This was a planned inspection covering all five key questions, including the care provided and the premises; the previous overall rating was Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 June 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.
What inspectors found, August 2017
Rated Outstanding overall; inspectors found kind, personalised care and strong leadership, with the other three areas rated Good.
The inspection was unannounced. Inspectors spent time with three of the four people living in the home, spoke with staff and managers, and checked care records, staff files, medicines records, policies and audits.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Responsive care. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines arrangements, personalised care records, appropriate training, flexible routines and prompt access to health services.
Caring and Well-led were rated Outstanding. Inspectors saw respectful relationships, support for independence and a strong focus on people's choices and wellbeing. The overall rating improved from Good at the January 2015 inspection, with no breaches found then or reported at this inspection.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that staff treated people as equals and built relationships based on trust. They described many examples of staff going beyond their usual roles to help people feel valued.
“The provider, registered manager and staff were committed to providing care that was kind, respectful, and dignified.” from the report
Support for independence
People were supported to make choices and take part in ordinary community life. The home also helped people continue employment and planned job coaching.
“Empowering people and maintaining independence was paramount to the service and their approaches to promote this were innovative.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
The report found enough staff with a suitable mix of skills. Staff received medicines training, were observed administering medicines and had their competence checked.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty 24 hours a day.” from the report
Strong leadership and improvement
The home had regular audits and action plans. Leaders encouraged feedback, staff development and new ways to involve people in decisions about the home.
“The service was exceptionally well led.” from the report
New reflective practice work was not complete
minorThe home was still introducing and developing a reflective practice approach. Inspectors said they wanted to see its progress and effect at the next inspection.
“We look forward to seeing the progress and impact for people on this initiative at our next inspection.” from the report
- 01How has the reflective practice programme developed since this inspection, and what difference has it made to people's care?
- 02How would you support my relative to make everyday choices and maintain their independence?
- 03How do you involve people living in the home when recruiting new staff?
- 04How would you respond if my relative's health or behaviour changed?
- 05How are families involved in care planning, reviews and decisions made in the person's best interests?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key areas and involved three of the four people living in the home; the report contains conflicting inspection dates, giving 31 May 2017 in the header and 27 and 28 June 2016 in the detailed findings. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 August 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 Mary's Residential Care Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2020Goodcurrent ratingdown from OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at St Mary's Residential Care Home →
- August 2017Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
Read what inspectors found at St Mary's Residential Care Home →
- February 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 May 2012.
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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Bristol, City of
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 £1,300 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She became a good friend to my mother in law, chatting with her, dancing with her, knitting with her and the list goes on”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.