CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 79 Harrow View
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed, staff knew safeguarding procedures, medicines were managed safely and staffing levels were adequate. Fire safety improvements had been made, but a return visit to check them had not yet taken place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs, preferences and health needs were assessed and reviewed. Staff had relevant training and worked with healthcare professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- People said staff treated them with dignity and respect. Inspectors observed friendly and respectful interactions, and found that people were supported to be independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised to people's needs, backgrounds and interests. People had individual activities, accessible information and a complaints process they understood.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Staff, people and relatives were positive about how the home was run. Regular audits, staff meetings and feedback systems were in place, although there was no CQC-registered manager at the inspection.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Support for Living Limited - 79 Harrow View was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no major concerns identified.
This was an unannounced inspection by one inspector. They spoke with six people, four care workers, managers and three care professionals. They also reviewed four care files, five staff files and records about medicines, maintenance and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and were treated with respect. Inspectors saw staff providing attentive care and found that people's individual needs, preferences and choices were understood.
Medicines, staffing, recruitment, cleanliness, fire arrangements and risk assessments were checked. The home was clean and medicines records showed people received their medicines as prescribed. The report also noted that there was no CQC-registered manager at the time, and a return fire safety visit was still awaited.
The previous inspection was also rated Good. The CQC said it would continue to monitor the service through the information it receives.
People felt safe and respected
People said they felt safe and were satisfied with their care. Inspectors observed staff speaking with people in a pleasant, respectful and friendly way.
“People told us they were satisfied with the care provided.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's routines, preferences, cultural and religious needs. Staff supported individual goals, including cooking, activities and greater independence.
“People received personalised care and support. Care plans detailed people's individual needs and included guidance about how care workers needed to support them.” from the report
Suitable staffing and training
The home had enough staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks, induction, training, supervision and appraisals were in place.
“Staff had been carefully recruited and essential pre-employment checks had been carried out.” from the report
No registered manager at the inspection
needs fixingThe home did not have a manager registered with the CQC when inspectors visited. The company was recruiting a new manager, so families should ask who is now responsible for the service.
“The home did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
Fire safety check was still pending
needs fixingThe home had acted on fire safety advice relating to a person who smoked in their bedroom. However, neither the fire authority nor the fire safety consultant had yet returned to confirm that the arrangements were adequate.
“However, neither the fire authority nor the home's fire safety consultant had yet carried out a return visit to check if the arrangements were adequate.” from the report
- 01Who is currently managing the home, and has a manager now been registered with the CQC?
- 02Has the fire authority or fire safety consultant completed the return visit, and what was the outcome?
- 03How are each person's mental health needs, risks and changing goals reviewed?
- 04How do residents choose their activities, meals and religious or cultural support?
- 05How are medicines audits and other quality checks used to identify and fix problems?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 October 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, April 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, while the home was recruiting a registered manager.
This was an unannounced inspection on 28 February and 1 March 2017. The inspector spoke with people living in the home, a relative, a visitor, care workers, managers and a social care professional. Records, medicines, staff files, care plans, the premises and quality checks were also examined.
The home was caring and responsive. People said they felt safe and were treated with respect. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable medicines arrangements, clean premises, individual care plans, regular activities and good support for healthcare needs.
The home did not have a registered manager because the previous manager had recently left. A team leader and relief manager were overseeing it, with support from the service manager. None of the care workers had completed the Care Certificate, although their induction covered similar topics and the home was starting this process.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection in March 2015 also rated the home Good, with no breaches of regulations.
Safe care and staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, suitable risk assessments and safe systems for medicines and emergencies.
“People's care needs and potential risks to them were assessed and care workers were aware of these risks.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff listened to people, respected their privacy and responded calmly when someone became distressed.
“The staff know how to communicate and encourage my relative. They listen to her and they show respect for my relative and her preferences.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's health needs, backgrounds, interests and preferences. People were involved in planning their care and activities.
“The home provided care which was individualised and person-centred.” from the report
Activities and choice
People could take part in activities such as cooking, knitting, outings and visits to community and day centres. They could also access the kitchen and garden.
“Activities arranged for people included cookery sessions, visits to community centres, day centres and a holiday to a holiday centre.” from the report
Quality checks
Senior staff and the service manager carried out regular checks on care records, medicines, fire safety, maintenance, cleanliness and activities.
“Senior staff carried out monthly checks on cleanliness, ventilation, fire exits, medicine administration charts, care documentation and maintenance of the home.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThe previous registered manager had left shortly before the inspection. The home was being overseen by a team leader and relief manager while candidates were being considered.
“The home did not have a registered manager.” from the report
Care Certificate not completed
minorNone of the care workers had completed the Care Certificate at the time of inspection. The report says their induction covered similar topics and the service was starting the Care Certificate process.
“None of the care workers had completed the 'Care Certificate'.” from the report
- 01Has a registered manager now been appointed, and who is responsible for the home until that happens?
- 02How many care workers have now completed the Care Certificate, and what further training is planned?
- 03How is the person's smoking risk managed if they smoke, including the daily safety checks described in the report?
- 04How would you tailor care plans, activities and healthcare support to my relative's individual needs and preferences?
- 05How are medicines audits and care-record checks carried out now?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five questions and the overall quality of the home; the previous March 2015 inspection also rated every area Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 April 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 79 Harrow View
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015Goodstayed GoodSafe: Good
- January 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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 Harrow
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. 75 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“The interaction she gives my mother is incredible, singing, dancing, taking her to groups, on plenty of walks which mum always loves.”
“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.