CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Stewart Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines procedures, effective infection control and appropriate systems for managing risks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found approachable management, effective quality checks and a positive culture. Staff, relatives and other professionals were encouraged to share their views.
What inspectors found, September 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred support, with minor improvements needed to some risk assessments.
This was an unannounced inspection on 8 August 2022. One inspector met people, observed daily routines, and spoke with relatives, staff and a health and social care professional. They reviewed support plans, medicines records, incidents, audits, policies and training information.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. Inspectors found enough skilled staff, safe medicines systems, suitable infection control measures and good safeguarding arrangements. People were supported to make choices, build independence and take part in activities.
The inspection only reviewed Safe and Well-led. The other three areas were not inspected and their previous ratings were used to calculate the overall rating. The previous overall rating was also Good.
Promoting independence
Staff focused on people's abilities and encouraged them to make decisions, develop skills and take part in activities.
“Staff focused on people's strengths and promoted what they could do, so people had a fulfilling and meaningful everyday life.” from the report
Enough skilled staff
There were enough staff to provide one-to-one support, activities and visits. The home also used experienced staff, training and induction for new staff.
“There were enough staff to ensure people had the one-to-one support they required and to enable to them to take part in activities and visits.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Staff followed systems for administering, recording and storing medicines. Staff training and checks helped make sure medicines were managed safely.
“People were supported by staff who followed systems and processes to administer, record and store medicines safely.” from the report
Positive management
Inspectors found managers approachable and involved. Staff felt supported and able to raise concerns and suggest improvements.
“The registered manager was visible in the service, approachable and took a genuine interest in what people, staff, family, advocates and other professionals had to say.” from the report
Learning from incidents
Incidents and near misses were recorded, reviewed and investigated. The home shared learning and made changes where needed.
“Incidents and accidents were reviewed, investigated, managed and lessons learned were shared.” from the report
Window restrictor risk assessment
minorSome window restrictors had been opened during very hot weather. A risk assessment existed, but inspectors said it needed more detail to make sure people were kept safe.
“more detail was required to ensure individuals were kept safe.” from the report
Infection-control risk assessments
minorInspectors suggested that some infection-control risk assessments should be reviewed so they reflected current guidance.
“We suggested to the registered manager that risk assessments were reviewed to ensure they reflected current guidance.” from the report
- 01What extra detail has been added to the risk assessment for opening window restrictors?
- 02How do you check that window restrictors remain safe for each person during hot weather?
- 03Have the infection prevention and control risk assessments been reviewed against current guidance?
- 04How will you assess the areas not reviewed at this inspection, especially Effective, Caring and Responsive?
- 05How do you make sure new and agency staff understand each person's communication, risks and support needs?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; the Effective, Caring and Responsive ratings carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 September 2022 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 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a registered manager still to be appointed.
This was an unannounced first inspection on 21 and 22 September 2017. The inspector spoke with two people living at the home, the manager and four staff members. They reviewed care records, staff files, training records, rotas, policies and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, safe medicines arrangements, good safeguarding knowledge and care plans that reflected people's needs.
People were treated with kindness and encouraged to make choices and remain independent. They had personalised activities, access to health professionals and ways to give feedback. The registered manager had left, and the home was recruiting a replacement, but the manager in post had relevant experience and inspectors rated leadership Good.
Staffing and recruitment
The home planned staffing around people's complex needs. Recruitment checks, including references and Disclosure and Barring Service checks, were completed before staff started.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff communicated patiently and warmly. People were supported to make choices, keep relationships and develop their independence.
“People were treated with kindness and compassion and had their privacy and dignity respected.” from the report
Personalised support
Care planning took account of people's abilities, preferences and communication needs. Activities included both home-based options and opportunities in the local community.
“People were supported to participate in a range of meaningful activities, in line with their interests and preferences.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff received an induction, ongoing training, supervision, team meetings and appraisals. Training covered both general care duties and people's specific needs.
“Staff received comprehensive support to carry out their role.” from the report
Registered manager vacancy
needs fixingThe registered manager had left before the inspection. A new manager was in post but did not want to become the registered manager, so recruitment was under way.
“At the time of our inspection the home was advertising to recruit a registered manager.” from the report
Food safety rating pending
minorThe kitchen had not yet received a rating from the local authority's food safety department at the time of the inspection.
“The kitchen had not yet been rated by the local authority's food safety department.” from the report
- 01Has a registered manager now been appointed, and who is responsible for the home until that happens?
- 02What is the current position on the two Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications that were awaiting assessment?
- 03Has the local authority's food safety department now rated the kitchen?
- 04How are people's personalised activities and daily choices recorded and reviewed?
- 05How are staff kept up to date with training for people's specific needs, including autism, epilepsy and communication using Makaton?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering all five CQC questions and providing the home's first overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 January 2018 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 Stewart Court
2 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2018GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 March 2016.
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.