CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Cedars Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, April 2021
The Cedars Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection controls, with some concerns about PPE use and the laundry area.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 31 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors were assured about visitor checks, testing, social distancing, safe admissions, outbreak planning and infection control policies. Families were supported to stay in contact through safe visits and video calls.
There were two areas where inspectors were only somewhat assured. Some auxiliary staff did not change their gloves between people's rooms, and the laundry area was too small to keep clean and dirty laundry safely separated. The manager acted straight away on the glove issue, and changes to laundry arrangements were planned and partly put in place after the inspection.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most of the five areas CQC usually assesses.
Keeping families in touch
The home arranged safe visits and video calls, and kept families updated about changes to guidance.
“People were supported to remain in contact with their families in line with government guidance.” from the report
Visitor safety checks
Visitors were screened, asked to test, and provided with PPE before entering.
“Visitors were asked to complete a lateral flow test for COVID-19 before they were allowed to enter the building.” from the report
Working with health services
The management team worked with local health and social care organisations and arranged infection control and PPE training.
“The management team had worked closely with colleagues across health and social care, such as the local infection control team, to ensure they were following the most up to date guidance.” from the report
Risk assessments
The home had risk assessments covering COVID-19 transmission and staff who were clinically vulnerable or in high-risk groups.
“Robust risk assessments were completed, making it clear how staff could reduce the risk of transmission of COVID-19.” from the report
Glove changes
needs fixingInspectors saw auxiliary staff move between people's rooms without changing their gloves on two occasions. The manager addressed this immediately and said refresher training and extra checks would follow.
“we observed auxiliary staff going between people's rooms without changing their gloves on two occasions.” from the report
Laundry area
needs fixingThe laundry room was too small to separate laundry safely, increasing the risk of recontamination. The home said bed linen was later sent to an external facility and planned a larger laundry area.
“The laundry area was designed in such a way that there was little room for anything other than the washing machine and dryer with no additional space to separate laundry, which increased the risk of recontamination.” from the report
- 01Has the planned larger laundry area been completed, and how are personal laundry and bed linen kept separate now?
- 02What refresher PPE training was completed after the inspection, and how often are staff checks carried out?
- 03How does the home make sure staff change gloves between people's rooms every time?
- 04Are the visitor testing, PPE and safe visiting arrangements still being used, and how are families updated when guidance changes?
- 05What arrangements are in place if there is a suspected infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under Safe during the COVID-19 pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 April 2021 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, January 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a medicines-recording issue corrected after the inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection on 28 November 2018. Two inspectors and an expert-by-experience spoke with people living in the home, staff, a relative and a healthcare professional. They observed care and checked care plans, recruitment files, medicines records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable training, safe medicines administration, clean premises and appropriate risk management.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Care was personalised, activities reflected people's interests, and people were supported with their health, nutrition, beliefs, privacy and independence. The home had a friendly culture and systems to gather feedback and improve care.
Inspectors found one medicines-recording shortfall. Handwritten additions to medicines records were not always signed by two staff members. The provider said this was corrected immediately after it was raised.
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect. Inspectors saw staff protect privacy and encourage independence.
“People were treated with kindness and respect, and staff were knowledgeable about people's needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's individual needs, preferences and communication styles. Activities and rooms were tailored to individuals.
“People received personalised care and activities, and were able to decorate their rooms in any way they pleased.” from the report
Good management and improvement
The management team was approachable and involved people, relatives and staff in decisions. Audits and feedback were used to make changes.
“There was a warm and friendly culture within the service amongst staff and people.” from the report
Medicines records were not always double-signed
needs fixingAdditional handwritten information on medicines administration records had not always been signed by two staff members, as current guidance required. The provider said this was put right immediately after inspectors raised it.
“Current guidance states that additional handwritten information about medicines added to MARs should be signed by two members of staff.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that handwritten additions to medicines administration records are signed by two staff members?
- 02How would you support my relative's specific dietary, swallowing, mobility or health needs?
- 03How do you involve relatives and healthcare professionals when reviewing a person's care plan?
- 04What activities would be available that match my relative's interests, beliefs and abilities?
- 05How would you record and follow my relative's wishes about future or end-of-life care?
This was an unannounced inspection of all five quality areas, involving observations, discussions with people and staff, and checks of selected records. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 January 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 Cedars Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 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 28 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
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.