CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 9 Perrys Close
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- There were enough staff, recruitment checks were in place, risks were assessed and medicines were managed safely. The home was clean and well maintained.
- Effective?
- Good
- People were supported to make choices and staff understood the Mental Capacity Act and related safeguards. Staff received relevant training, and people were supported with food, drink and healthcare.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, patient and respectful. People appeared relaxed with staff, and their privacy, dignity, routines and independence were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised, including people's preferences, communication needs, goals and activities. Staff used positive behaviour support and helped people stay in contact with family and take part in the community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The registered manager and provider had systems for checking quality, supporting staff and sharing learning. The report found strong values and a commitment to improving support.
What inspectors found, May 2018
The Kent Autistic Trust - 9 Perrys Close was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and person-centred support, with a previous medicines problem improved.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 13 February 2018. It was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions. The inspector observed care, spoke with staff and a relative, contacted professionals, and checked care, medicines, staffing and quality records.
The home supported five people with autism in a building designed for six people. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, detailed care plans, safe medicines practice, kind interactions and good support for people's choices, health, independence and activities.
At the previous inspection in January 2016, the home had breached the regulation on safe medicines management. Inspectors found this had improved. All five areas were rated Good, which means the service met the CQC standards inspected, although the report still identified some minor improvements.
Medicines improved
The previous medicines problem had been addressed. Inspectors found that medicines were stored, given and checked safely.
“Medicines were given at the appropriate times and people were fully aware of what they were taking and why they were taking their medicines.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and goals. Staff supported people to make choices and develop independence.
“People had very detailed care plans in place, which reflected their current needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People appeared comfortable with staff. Staff respected privacy and dignity and adapted their communication to each person.
“We observed positive interactions between people and staff. People were at ease and comfortable in each staff member's presence.” from the report
Positive behaviour support
The specialist positive behaviour support team worked with staff and relatives. Inspectors found this had helped reduce incidents for at least one person.
“We found this approach was embedded into staff practice and had resulted in less incidents of challenging behaviour and people had a better quality of life as a result.” from the report
Quality checks
The provider used audits, visits and feedback to monitor the home and act on shortfalls.
“Checks and audits were carried out within the service to monitor quality and to identify how the service could be improved.” from the report
Weekly meetings were not recorded
minorPeople had weekly meetings about menus, shopping and activities, but these meetings had not been recorded. The manager said records would be introduced to show how people's views were acted on.
“These meetings were informal and had not been recorded.” from the report
End of life policy was being updated
minorThe home had supported people well after a death, but the report said the end of life policy still needed updating to record people's wishes and preferences.
“The registered manager told us plans were in place to work on updating the end of life care policy for the service to look at people's preferences, wishes and wants.” from the report
Minor medicines audit issue
minorAn audit found that one prescribed cream had not been dated when opened. Staff identified this, returned it to the pharmacy and dealt with the issue promptly.
“One issue was that one person's prescribed Duac cream had not been dated on opening.” from the report
- 01How are weekly house meetings now recorded, and how do you show that people's choices and requests have been acted on?
- 02What changes were made after the previous medicines breach, and how are medicines checks carried out today?
- 03Has the end of life care policy been updated to record each person's wishes and preferences?
- 04How does the positive behaviour support team work with staff and relatives when a person's anxiety or behaviour changes?
- 05How many staff will support my relative during activities in the community, and how are staffing numbers decided?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection of all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 May 2018 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 9 Perrys Close
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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
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.