CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Stables Flat
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Medicines were stored in a laundry room, temperatures were not monitored and medicines audits were not being completed consistently. Records showed people received medicines as prescribed, and the provider introduced temperature checks and planned to move the storage.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff knew people well, training was monitored and people were supported with food, drinks, health needs and independence. Some care plans lacked enough detail about managing behaviour that might challenge.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with warmth, kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in care reviews and supported to make choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records reflected people's preferences, communication needs and relationships. People were supported to access the community, and there was a clear complaints process.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home was open to advice and acted quickly on concerns found during the inspection. Inspectors recommended improving management capacity and the programme of audits.
What inspectors found, February 2019
Rated Good overall, but Safe Requires Improvement because medicines were not always managed safely.
This was a planned inspection over two days in December 2018. One inspector reviewed care records, medicines records, accident reports and quality checks. They spoke with three people living in the home, relatives, the manager and three support staff.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. Safe was rated Requires Improvement because medicines storage, temperature checks, medicines audits and the controlled medicines register were not reliable.
Inspectors found kind staff, positive relationships and a warm atmosphere. People received their medicines as prescribed, staffing levels were sufficient, care was personalised and people were supported to make choices and access the community.
The home had also been rated Good at the previous inspection, published in May 2016. During this inspection, the provider took action to improve medicines storage and temperature monitoring, and repaired damaged bathroom surfaces.
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw warm and respectful relationships between staff and people. The home had a friendly, family atmosphere.
“Staff were kind and caring and there was a warm, family atmosphere.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found there were enough staff to meet people's care needs. Extra hours could be arranged for appointments.
“There were sufficient staff employed to meet the care needs of people living in the home.” from the report
Respect and privacy
Staff asked permission before providing support and entering bedrooms. People were supported to be independent and to access the community.
“We saw staff knocking people's doors and calling out before entering and they asked permission from people before allowing us to see their bedrooms.” from the report
Medicines checks
seriousMedicines were not always stored or checked safely. Temperature readings and medicines audits were missing, and the controlled medicines record did not match the stock.
“Temperature readings of medicine storage areas and medicines audits were not being completed and the controlled medicines register did not reflect the controlled medicines stock.” from the report
Incomplete care guidance
needs fixingSome care plans did not give enough guidance about how staff should manage behaviour that might challenge. Inspectors said staff's knowledge of people reduced the impact of this omission.
“Care plans were not consistently detailed and lacked guidance on how staff should effectively manage behaviours which might challenge.” from the report
Limited management capacity
needs fixingThe manager and senior support worker worked together for only one hour each week. Inspectors recommended finding ways to strengthen management capacity and auditing.
“Due to working patterns the registered manager and senior support worker worked together for just one hour per week meaning that sharing ideas and expertise was not easy to facilitate.” from the report
- 01Have medicines now been moved from the laundry room to a suitable storage area?
- 02How are medicine storage temperatures checked and recorded twice each day?
- 03How often are medicines audits now completed, and how are controlled medicines stocks checked against the register?
- 04How have care plans been improved to guide staff when someone may show behaviour that might challenge?
- 05How does the manager now make sure there is enough time for auditing and sharing information with the senior support worker?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 February 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 Stables Flat
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 August 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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.