CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Tanners Farm
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding, risk management and medicines procedures, and inspectors found enough staff and accurate medicines records.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and supported people to access healthcare. People's needs, eating and drinking risks, oral health and consent were addressed.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, respectful and caring. People were involved in decisions, and staff used suitable communication methods to support people to express their views.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans described people's preferences, routines and independence. People were supported with activities, relationships, complaints and communication needs.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the manager. Quality checks, feedback and incident reviews were used to identify and make improvements.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a new manager applying to register.
The inspection took place on 7 and 8 October 2019. One inspector reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management records. They also spoke with three people living in the home, three relatives and five staff.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and staff who understood people's needs. People were supported with healthcare, food, activities, communication and making choices.
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Care plans were personal and regularly reviewed. The home had a positive culture and used checks and feedback to improve care. The overall Good rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published on 7 April 2017.
Safe staffing and risk support
Inspectors found enough staff and a consistent team who knew people well. Risk assessments gave staff clear guidance, including for falls, epilepsy and eating and drinking.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors observed respectful support that protected privacy, dignity and people's choices.
“We observed staff interacting with people and found they were supportive, kind and caring.” from the report
Personalised support and activities
Care plans recorded people's routines, preferences, strengths and independence. People were supported to take part in activities such as gardening, holidays, cinema visits and arts and crafts.
“The people and relatives we spoke with told us they led an active and fulfilling life.” from the report
Good communication and involvement
Staff used pictures and other communication methods when needed. People and relatives were involved in care planning and reviews.
“Staff worked creatively and used pictures to enable people to express their views and make decisions.” from the report
Quality improvement
The home used audits, feedback and incident reviews to improve care. Inspectors saw an example where a new care planning system was introduced after an audit.
“Effective quality assurance checks were carried out by key staff members, the manager as well as the provider.” from the report
Manager registration
minorA new manager was working at the home and said they would apply to register with CQC. The report does not confirm the outcome of that application.
“There was a new manager working at Tanners Farm. They told us they would be applying to register with the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
End of life planning
minorNobody was receiving end of life care during the inspection. The manager said discussions about end of life care planning were planned after the inspection.
“The manager told us although they had a young client group, they planned to discuss end of life care planning with people and their representatives following the inspection.” from the report
- 01Has the manager's application to register with CQC been completed, and who is legally responsible for the home now?
- 02How are end of life care wishes discussed and recorded for each person?
- 03How often are care plans reviewed when a person's needs or health change?
- 04How are people supported to choose activities and communicate their views?
- 05What checks are carried out on medicines, care plans and incidents, and how are any actions followed up?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the care provided and the premises; the previous overall rating was Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 December 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, with improvements since the previous inspection.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 15 February 2017. One inspector visited the home, spoke with people, a relative, the manager and staff, and observed care and activities. Records on care, medicines, staff, safety and quality checks were also reviewed.
The home supported up to seven people with a learning disability, including autism. Four people lived there at the time. Inspectors found that medicines were managed safely, staffing levels met people's needs, and staff had suitable training and supervision.
People were supported by kind staff who knew them well. Care plans reflected their needs, choices and routines. People took part in activities, went out regularly and were encouraged to build independence.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Concerns found at the October 2015 inspection about medicines, the Mental Capacity Act and quality checks had been addressed.
Safe medicines support
Staff were trained and tested as competent before administering medicines. Records were up to date and the manager carried out regular checks.
“People's medicines were managed and administered safely by trained staff.” from the report
Kind and knowledgeable staff
Staff understood people's communication, routines and backgrounds. Inspectors saw warm and respectful interactions.
“People were supported by staff who knew them well and were kind and compassionate.” from the report
Improved management checks
The home had regular quality, fire and health and safety audits. Actions identified by these checks were followed up.
“Quality assurance systems were in place. Where improvements were identified these were actioned by management.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are medicines currently checked, including medicines taken out of the home and 'as required' medicines?
- 02How do you make sure there are enough staff for each person's one-to-one support, activities and outings?
- 03How are mental capacity assessments and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications kept up to date?
- 04How are people's individual routines, goals and activity plans reviewed when their needs or preferences change?
- 05What quality and safety audits are carried out now, and how are actions followed through?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service covering all five CQC questions, based on observations, discussions and selected records. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 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 Tanners Farm
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 November 2014.
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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.