CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Gables
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, January 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found people safe and supported, but meal timings and staff supervision needed attention.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 22 September 2022. Two inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and professionals. They also reviewed care records, medicine records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were all rated Good. People were protected from abuse, risks and medicines were managed safely, and staff were recruited safely. People received suitable healthcare and were involved in decisions about the home.
Inspectors found some areas needing improvement. There was a long gap between meals, some staff did not receive regular formal supervision, and parts of the building needed renovation. The home had already improved its care plan audits, and the Well-led rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection to Good.
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found care plans and risk assessments for everyone. Staff were trained to give medicines safely, and recruitment checks had been completed.
“Care plans and risk assessments were in place for all people. Staff were recruited safely.” from the report
Good healthcare support
People had access to appropriate healthcare professionals. Records showed staff worked with other professionals to meet people's needs.
“The staff want to work with me and are quick to respond.” from the report
Improved oversight
Care plan audits had improved since the previous inspection. The audits identified needed changes and managers ensured these were made promptly.
“During this inspection, we found improvements were made.” from the report
Long gap between meals
needs fixingBreakfast was served late in the morning and some people asked staff for food. The manager agreed to work with people and kitchen staff to improve meal timings.
“There was a long gap between meal services.” from the report
Formal staff supervision
minorSome staff had not received regular formal supervision from their line manager. They said informal support happened often and that management supported them.
“Some staff told us they had not received regular, formal supervision from their line manager.” from the report
Building and room guidance
minorSome areas needed renovation. There were also few personal photos or memorable items outside rooms, which could make it harder for some people to find their own room.
“There was a lack of photos or memorable items specific to the person outside of their room.” from the report
- 01What has changed about the timing of breakfast and the gaps between meals?
- 02How do you make sure people can get food and drinks when they wake up or feel hungry?
- 03How often do staff now receive formal supervision, and how is this recorded?
- 04What renovation work is still outstanding, and when is it expected to be completed?
- 05What personal signs or room markers are now used to help people find their rooms?
The unannounced inspection covered Safe, Effective and Well-led; separate Caring and Responsive ratings are not given in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 January 2023 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 2021
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe care and improvements, but the home still needed to improve its leadership and care-plan checks.
This was an unannounced inspection on 25 February 2021. Two inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, recruitment information and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe. Inspectors found that medicines were given as prescribed, risks were managed, there were enough staff and recruitment checks were carried out. Infection control arrangements were also in line with current guidance.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Well-led. Care plan audits did not always identify missing information, and some environmental risk assessments had not been reviewed on time. The overall rating was Good because the other three key question ratings were carried forward from an earlier comprehensive inspection.
The previous overall rating was Requires Improvement, with multiple breaches. This inspection found improvements and confirmed that the home was no longer in breach of regulations.
Medicines
Medicines were given as prescribed. Staff who administered medicines had training and regular checks of their competence.
“This inspection found improvement and medicines were administered as prescribed.” from the report
Managing risks
People's risks were assessed and managed. Staff could explain how they supported people safely, including with dietary risks.
“This inspection found risks were assessed and managed well.” from the report
Staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe. Recruitment included references and criminal record checks.
“The provider continued to recruit staff safely through the requirement of references and application to the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS).” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured about the home's arrangements for preventing and managing infection, including PPE, testing and admissions.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Learning from incidents
Accidents and incidents were recorded and reviewed. Inspectors saw appropriate referrals to professionals when needed.
“Accidents and incidents were recorded by staff when they occurred, and these were reviewed regularly by the management team in the home.” from the report
Care plan detail
needs fixingCare plan audits did not always find missing information about choking, diabetes, mobility and behaviour. This could leave new staff without all the information they need.
“Care plan audits failed to identify there was not always enough detail in people's care plans for staff to follow in relation to choking, diabetes, mobility and behaviour.” from the report
Environmental risk reviews
needs fixingSome environmental risk assessments had not been reviewed promptly. The manager addressed this during the inspection.
“The providers systems to monitor the service failed to identify environmental risk assessments had not been reviewed timely.” from the report
- 01How have you improved care plan audits since this inspection?
- 02How do you make sure care plans contain enough detail about choking, diabetes, mobility and behaviour?
- 03How often are environmental risk assessments reviewed, and how do you record changes?
- 04What were the previous ratings for Caring, Effective and Responsive, which were not inspected during this visit?
- 05How do you check that medicines continue to be given at the prescribed times?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; Caring, Effective and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 March 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.
Every inspection of The Gables
7 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2020Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2016Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2016
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 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 Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.