CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 1 St Quintin Avenue
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, September 2019
Support for Living Limited - 1 St Quintin Avenue was rated Good overall, but inspectors found health guidance and records were not always up to date.
This was a planned inspection on 22 July 2019. One inspector reviewed care records, staff records and management information, observed care, and spoke with two people, a relative, staff and managers.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were protected from avoidable harm, treated kindly, involved in their care and supported to follow their interests and take part in activities.
The Effective rating was Requires Improvement. Some healthcare recommendations were not followed, seizure information was not consistently recorded, and some health action plans contained old information. The report says the home had an improvement plan and planned further staff training.
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found that risks were properly assessed and reviewed. Medicines were stored and administered safely, with regular checks.
“Staff continued to manage people's medicines safely and as prescribed.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People were treated with dignity and staff spent time talking with them and supporting their choices.
“Staff spoke with people in a caring and respectful way.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described what people could do for themselves and the support they needed. People were helped to follow hobbies, interests and relationships.
“People's care plans and risk assessments continued to be person-centred and clearly detailed what people could do for themselves and what they required support with.” from the report
Activities and community life
People took part in walks, visits, music and dance sessions, celebrations and other activities in the local community.
“People were encouraged to maintain close relationships, maintain hobbies and interests and participate in all aspects of the local community.” from the report
Healthcare advice was not always followed
needs fixingInspectors found examples of dental advice not being followed. The home agreed to review healthcare recommendations and improve its monitoring.
“We found examples where recommendations from a person's dentist were not being followed and where information relating to a person's seizures was not being consistently recorded.” from the report
Some health records were out of date
needs fixingHealth action plans did not always contain current information. One plan referred to a medicines review from 2016 even though the medicines had since been reviewed and changed.
“However, we noted that people's health action plans did not always reference the most up to date information about their health.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that recommendations from dentists and other healthcare professionals are followed in daily care?
- 02How are seizure information and other changes in people's health recorded and handed over to staff?
- 03How do you make sure every health action plan is updated after a medicines review or other healthcare appointment?
- 04What further training have staff received on the electronic recording system, and how do managers check that important information is not missed?
- 05How often are care and support records reviewed with the person and their family?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; the previous overall rating was Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 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.
What inspectors found, March 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with improvements since earlier medicines and governance concerns.
The announced inspection took place on 31 January 2017. One inspector spoke with four people, the registered manager, the deputy manager and three support staff. The inspector also observed care, checked care and staff records, and contacted three relatives.
The home supported five adults with learning and physical disabilities, although it was registered for up to seven people. Inspectors found that medicines were managed safely, risks were assessed, staff were trained, and people received help with food, healthcare, activities and daily choices.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Care plans were up to date and reflected people's wishes. The home also had regular checks on medicines, care records, safety and incidents.
The overall rating was Good. Each of the five areas was also rated Good. The previous inspection in December 2015 had found breaches about medicines management and good governance, but inspectors found these issues had been addressed at this visit.
Safe medicines
Medicines were locked away and administered by trained staff. Inspectors found the administration records accurate and complete.
“All MAR sheets were up to date, accurate with no evident gaps or errors.” from the report
Kind relationships
People and relatives gave positive feedback. Inspectors observed staff treating people with kindness, patience and respect.
“Throughout our visit we saw kind and respectful interaction between staff and people who used the service.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's choices, preferences and support needs. Staff understood how to provide individual support.
“Care plans were person centred, well organised and comprehensive in scope and detail.” from the report
Improved oversight
The provider had regular checks on care records, medicines and the environment. This addressed the governance concern found at the previous inspection.
“At this inspection we found that the provider was carrying out regular auditing of care records, medicines records and health and safety environmental checks.” from the report
Staffing levels
minorSome staff felt that more staff were needed on duty. The report did not say that this had caused harm, but families should ask how staffing levels are decided.
“although some staff members felt they needed more staff on duty.” from the report
- 01How many staff are usually on duty for the number and needs of people living here?
- 02What has been done in response to staff saying they needed more staff on duty?
- 03How are medicines audits checked now, following the medicines management breach found in December 2015?
- 04How often are care records, medicines records and health and safety checks reviewed?
- 05What has changed since this inspection in January 2017?
This was an announced inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC questions and reviewing care, staff and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 March 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 1 St Quintin Avenue
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- September 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 October 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Kensington and Chelsea
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 £1,270 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 12 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.”
“The interaction she gives my mother is incredible, singing, dancing, taking her to groups, on plenty of walks which mum always loves.”
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.