CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Stratford Court
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- People felt safe and received medicines as prescribed, but fire drills and personal emergency evacuation plans were not properly recorded or in place. Risk assessments and care plans were also not consistently updated.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- People were supported with food, drink and healthcare, but some pre-admission assessments, nutrition information and staff competency checks were incomplete or out of date.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Staff and relatives spoke positively about the management and staff felt supported. However, quality checks had not found or dealt with several problems in records, safety checks, recruitment and care planning.
What inspectors found, December 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found people generally supported well, but safety checks, care records and management oversight were not reliable.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 27 and 28 September 2022. Inspectors reviewed Safe, Effective and Well-led. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals, and checked care records, medicines, staff files and management records.
People told inspectors they felt safe and received their medicines as prescribed. Staff knew people well, responded to requests and worked with healthcare professionals. However, care plans and risk assessments were not always up to date. Fire safety records, evacuation plans, equipment servicing and food safety checks were incomplete.
The home did not always assess people fully before admission or check staff skills regularly. Its quality assurance systems had failed to identify several problems. The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection, published in April 2019, to Requires Improvement.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe. Staff had safeguarding training and knew how to report concerns.
“People told us they felt safe living at Stratford Court.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were stored safely and records showed people received them as prescribed. Pain relief patches were rotated using body maps.
“Medicines were stored safely and records indicated people received their medicine as required.” from the report
Healthcare support
Staff worked as a team and alongside healthcare professionals to meet people's health needs.
“Staff worked well together as a team, sharing information and working alongside other healthcare professionals.” from the report
Respect for choices
Staff obtained consent before providing support. Where restrictions were used, best-interest meetings and applications for authorisations had taken place.
“Staff understood the principles of the MCA and were observed to obtain people's consent prior to offering support.” from the report
Consistent staff team
People were supported promptly by regular staff who knew them. Staff said they felt supported in their work.
“We observed people were supported in a timely manner by a consistent group of staff who knew them well.” from the report
Fire and evacuation safety
seriousThere were no personal emergency evacuation plans. The last recorded fire drill was from November 2018, so the home could not show that people could safely escape.
“There were no Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) in place for people living at the service.” from the report
Out-of-date care records
seriousCare plans and risk assessments were not consistently reviewed. Information about falls and weight-loss risks was not always recorded or passed to staff.
“Information in people's care plans and risk assessments was not consistently reviewed to ensure it reflected people's current needs.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousAudits and quality checks did not identify several problems, including missing safety records, recruitment gaps and overdue staff competency checks.
“Systems and processes to ensure monitoring and oversight of the quality and safety of the service were not operating effectively.” from the report
Staff checks and training
needs fixingSome staff files did not show that employment gaps had been explored. Moving and handling competency checks for five staff were more than 12 months out of date.
“Records demonstrating staff competency checks in moving and handling were out of date.” from the report
Food safety records
needs fixingFridge and freezer temperatures had not been recorded for the previous week, and some food was out of date. The out-of-date items were removed during the inspection.
“There was no record of fridge and freezer daily temperature checks for the week prior to the inspection.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
minorVisitors had to book appointments and were kept out of most of the home. Inspectors said this approach did not follow government guidance at the time.
“This approach was not in line with government guidance.” from the report
- 01Have personal emergency evacuation plans now been completed for every person, and when was the most recent fire drill?
- 02How are care plans and risk assessments reviewed after falls, weight loss or other changes in need?
- 03How do you now check staff recruitment files and keep moving and handling competency checks up to date?
- 04What system ensures fridge and freezer temperatures are recorded when the usual staff member is absent?
- 05What improvements have been made to the quality assurance system since this inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were used in calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 December 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, April 2019
Stratford Court was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
Inspectors visited on 12 February 2019. They spoke with people, relatives, staff, the manager and a healthcare professional. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicines, recruitment records and quality checks.
The home was supporting 22 people at the time, although it could provide care for 30 people. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness and supported by staff who understood their needs.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The report says legal requirements were met, and the home had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe and staff understood how to recognise and report abuse. Risks such as falls were reviewed and steps were taken to reduce them.
“People were safe and protected from avoidable harm. Legal requirements were met.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff supporting people patiently and discreetly. People were given choices and supported to keep their privacy, dignity and independence.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included people's preferences, interests and personal history. People could take part in group or individual activities, or choose not to.
“People's needs were met through good organisation and delivery.” from the report
Improved management checks
The home had introduced audits and used them to act on errors and improve the service. This addressed the quality assurance problem found at the previous inspection.
“At this inspection, we found the required improvements had been made the provider was meeting the regulations.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you support people living with dementia, including the planned specialist signage and picture cards?
- 02How do you check that medicines continue to be administered safely and recorded correctly?
- 03What activities are available for someone who prefers individual activities or does not want to join group activities?
- 04How do you review care plans when a person's needs or risks change?
- 05How do people and relatives give feedback, and what changes have been made recently as a result?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating, with records, observations and feedback from people, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 April 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 Stratford Court
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- December 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.