CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Island Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found medicines, staffing, infection control, accidents and safety risks were managed appropriately.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received suitable food, drinks, training and healthcare support. Staff assessed and reviewed people’s needs, including changing swallowing and health needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not looked at during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was carried forward into the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not looked at during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was carried forward into the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team used audits, records and action plans to monitor and improve the service. People, relatives and staff described an open culture and felt able to raise concerns.
What inspectors found, September 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and clear improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 30 June 2021. Inspectors checked Safe, Effective and Well-led, including infection control. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and reviewed care, medicine, staffing and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, medicines were managed safely, staffing was sufficient, and risks were assessed. Staff were trained and supported, people received suitable food and healthcare, and people’s choices were respected.
The home had previously been rated Requires improvement in November 2019 because of concerns about medicines records and quality checks. Inspectors found these improvements had been made and the home was no longer in breach of regulations. The overall rating changed to Good, although some areas were not inspected during this visit.
Kind and caring staff
People and relatives gave positive feedback about staff. People had regular staff they knew well.
“People and relatives provided positive feedback about the service. They told us staff were kind and caring.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Medicines were stored securely, recorded correctly and checked regularly. Inspectors also observed good practice during a medicines round.
“All medicines were recorded appropriately. Records show medicines given as prescribed and appropriate keys used on the medicines administration records when people refused etc.” from the report
Good health support
Staff monitored people’s health and acted promptly when someone became unwell or needed specialist support.
“Records showed that staff took timely action when people were ill.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff could speak with managers. The management team used checks and action plans to improve the service.
“The management team promoted an open culture and were a visible presence in the service, staff felt listened to and valued.” from the report
Limited survey responses
minorThe report says only four relatives returned the survey. This means the survey evidence represented a small number of relatives, although the responses received were positive.
“Relatives received a survey about the service in January 2021, the response rate was low, only four completed surveys were returned.” from the report
- 01How are medicine audits carried out now, and what happens if an error is found?
- 02How will you review and update my relative’s risk assessments if their mobility, swallowing or health needs change?
- 03What were the results of the most recent surveys and residents’ meetings, and what actions followed?
- 04How are any conditions on Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisations monitored and reviewed?
- 05Can you explain which ratings for Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 September 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, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control.
This was a targeted inspection on 30 November 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control because of the COVID-19 outbreak response.
Inspectors saw staff using personal protective equipment and found that supplies were available at stations around the home. Cleaning had increased, including cleaning of light switches and door handles. The home had also introduced regular antiviral fogging and cleanliness audits.
Inspectors were assured about visitor safety, shielding and social distancing, admissions, PPE, testing, cleanliness, outbreak management and the infection control policy. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating.
PPE available and used
Staff were seen wearing PPE when supporting people, and PPE was available at stations around the home.
“Staff were observed wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) when supporting people.” from the report
Regular cleaning
Cleaning schedules had been increased, with frequent cleaning of areas such as light switches and door handles. Cleanliness was checked through regular audits.
“Cleaning schedules had been increased.” from the report
Clear COVID-19 information
The home gave people and staff information about COVID-19 in different ways, including easy-to-read guidance.
“The registered manager provided people and staff information about COVID-19 in a variety of ways.” from the report
Infection control systems
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements covering testing, safe admissions, visitors and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are PPE stations kept supplied, and what happens if staff need PPE urgently?
- 02How often are people and staff tested, and how are test results used?
- 03How are visitors currently prevented from catching or spreading infections?
- 04What arrangements are in place to manage a new infection outbreak?
- 05How often are the infection prevention and control policy and cleaning audits reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the home was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 December 2020 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 Island Residential Home
8 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- September 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2019Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2019Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- April 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- August 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 2015.
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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 £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.