CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at The Cedar Gardens Care Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home had effective infection prevention and control arrangements, including visitor screening, PPE, testing, cleaning and ventilation. They found that staff testing did not fully reflect government guidance.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and safe visiting arrangements, but staff testing did not fully follow government guidance.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 3 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks. This included screening visitors, providing PPE and rapid testing, cleaning and disinfecting premises, using ventilation and supporting social distancing.
The home also met the requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals to be vaccinated against COVID-19. However, staff testing was not as frequent as government guidance recommended, and the manager said this would be reviewed immediately.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a rated judgement for the five main areas of care.
Infection control
The home had measures to reduce the risk of infections spreading. Inspectors were assured about its policies, cleaning, ventilation, PPE and outbreak arrangements.
“The service had implemented effective infection prevention and control measures to ensure people, their relatives and staff were protected from infections.” from the report
Safe visiting
Visitors were screened and had access to PPE and rapid testing. The home provided designated visiting areas and followed up-to-date visiting guidance.
“Relatives who visited their loved ones had access to appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and rapid testing on-site.” from the report
Staff testing frequency
needs fixingThe frequency of staff testing did not fully reflect government guidance. The manager said the approach would be reviewed immediately.
“We found that the frequency of testing for staff did not fully reflect government guidance.” from the report
- 01How often are staff tested now, and what changed after the inspection?
- 02How do you check that visitors complete screening and use the required PPE?
- 03How are you managing any COVID-19-related staffing pressures?
- 04How are infection outbreaks prevented and managed now?
- 05What visiting arrangements and testing are currently available for relatives?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; the home was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 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, June 2019
The Cedar Gardens Care Limited was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with only minor concerns about food feedback and tired areas.
This was an unannounced inspection over two days. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff, volunteers and a health and social care professional. They also observed care and checked care, medicine, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were treated with dignity and respect, felt safe, and received support with medicines, food, drink and healthcare.
Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe recruitment, regular training and systems for managing risks, complaints and incidents. They also found that people were involved in decisions, and that care plans reflected their needs and preferences.
The home had been rated Good at the previous inspection, published in October 2016. This inspection found that the good rating continued.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding procedures and how to report concerns.
“People told us they felt safe living at the home.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were securely stored, checked and audited. Inspectors saw people receiving appropriate support, and records showed medicines were given as prescribed.
“Medicine administration records showed that people had received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Personalised care
People and relatives were involved in care planning. Plans covered individual needs, preferences, cultural needs and interests.
“People, and where appropriate their relatives, had been involved in the development of care plans.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors observed compassionate interactions. People were supported with privacy, dignity, independence and contact with relatives and friends.
“Staff treated people kindly.” from the report
Open management
The management team was described as approachable and supportive. Quality checks and systems for learning from incidents and complaints were in place.
“The management team was open and transparent throughout the inspection process and demonstrated a commitment to the ongoing development of the service.” from the report
Some areas looked tired
minorInspectors noted that some parts of the home, including the front entrance, looked tired. Management said specific areas were planned for refurbishment.
“We observed some areas of the home looked tired, for example, the front entrance.” from the report
Mixed feedback about food
minorMost feedback about food was positive, but one relative said it could be improved. Management said they would work with the relative to address the concern.
“One relative told us the food was not so good and could improve.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the food since the concern raised at the inspection?
- 02Has the planned refurbishment of the front entrance and other tired areas been completed?
- 03How would you meet my relative's specific nursing, dementia, swallowing or dietary needs?
- 04How are relatives involved in reviewing care plans and decisions about care?
- 05What activities and support would be available to match my relative's interests and communication needs?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering all five quality areas and the overall rating; the previous overall rating was Good, published on 28 October 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 June 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 The Cedar Gardens Care Limited
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at The Cedar Gardens Care Limited →
- June 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The Cedar Gardens Care Limited →
- October 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 December 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 Barnet
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 £1,300 a week. 83 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.”
“Folasade is really kind, patient and respectful, has a fantastic sense of humour and such a positive outlook on life.”
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.