CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sudbury Care Homes Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control measures during the COVID-19 thematic review.
The inspection took place on 17 November 2020 and was announced. It was a focused review of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
The home supported up to five people with learning disabilities, and four people were living there at the time. Inspectors found detailed COVID-19 risk assessments, staff training, regular testing and suitable use of protective equipment.
There were controls for visitors, cleaning and social distancing. People also had visiting plans and support to keep in touch with family and friends.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other four questions.
Risk assessments
People and staff had detailed COVID-19 risk assessments. These identified people at higher risk and included steps to reduce infection risks.
“People using the service and staff had detailed Covid-19 risk assessments, which identified those who were at a higher risk, and included measures to reduce the risk of infection.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors were screened and risk assessed before entering. The arrangements included temperature checks, questions about symptoms and contact with infection.
“All visitors to the home were screened and risk assessed to reduce the risk of the spread of infection.” from the report
Testing and protective equipment
People and staff had regular COVID-19 testing. Staff had training in infection control and protective equipment, and visitors were given protective equipment.
“People and staff had access to regular testing for Covid19.” from the report
Keeping in touch
The home supported people to maintain contact with family and friends through garden visits, telephone calls and video calls. Visiting plans were personalised and reviewed.
“People had personalised visiting plans which were kept under review.” from the report
Cleaning and layout
Enhanced cleaning covered frequently touched areas. The home also created more space to support social distancing.
“Enhanced cleaning schedules were in place.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people's COVID-19 risk assessments kept up to date, especially for anyone at higher risk?
- 02How often are people and staff tested, and what happens if someone has symptoms or a positive result?
- 03How are personalised visiting plans reviewed, and what visiting options are available now?
- 04How are cleaning of frequently touched areas and the use of protective equipment checked?
This was a thematic review focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it inspected Safe but did not rate the service overall or the other four questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 December 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, September 2019
Sudbury Care Homes Limited was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with no major concerns.
This was an unannounced, planned inspection on 20 August 2019. One inspector spoke with three people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines records, recruitment files, training records, incident records and quality checks.
The home supported five people with learning disabilities. People said they felt safe and were treated with dignity and respect. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines systems, assessed risks, good infection control and staff who understood people's needs.
People were supported to make choices, build independence, access the community and take part in activities. Care plans were personalised, communication needs were recorded, and staff worked with health and social care professionals.
All five CQC areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the report found people's outcomes were consistently good and that the home was consistently managed.
Safe medicines
Staff had medicines training and competency checks. Inspectors found the medicines administration records complete, with no unexplained gaps.
“We looked at a sample of medication administration records (MARs) and found that these were completed fully with no gaps.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in decisions about their care and daily lives. Support included developing independent living skills, working, shopping, cooking and using the local community.
“The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors observed a friendly atmosphere and staff who were patient and respectful.
“There was a friendly and welcoming atmosphere in the home.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's routines, preferences, communication needs, goals and support needs. People and relatives were involved in planning and reviewing care.
“Person centred plans were in place for each person.” from the report
Good teamwork
Staff said management was supportive and approachable. Inspectors found effective communication, positive morale and regular quality checks.
“Staff spoke positively about how they worked well together as a team and the effective lines of communication between staff.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are each person's care plans and risk assessments reviewed when their needs or wishes change?
- 02How will you support my relative to build independence and take part in activities they enjoy in the local community?
- 03How are medicines checked, and how would you support my relative to become more independent with medicines if appropriate?
- 04What staffing levels are in place now, and have there been any changes to the staff team since this inspection?
- 05How are people and relatives involved in monthly meetings, care reviews and decisions about future or end of life care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the previous Good ratings checked and retained. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 September 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 Sudbury Care Homes Limited
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 January 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Brent
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 £1,260 a week. 74 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“The quality of life that she's given my parents has been priceless. The peace of mind she's given my sisters and I, through a very difficult time, has been invaluable.”
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult 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.