CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Knoll
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, September 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found safe infection-control arrangements during the pandemic.
Inspectors visited on 18 August 2020. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. It looked only at infection prevention and control measures.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks safely. This included visitor screening, social distancing, shielding, admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, cleaning and the use of the building.
The home was inspected but not rated overall. The Safe question was also inspected but not rated, so this report is not a full assessment of the quality of care.
Strong infection-control planning
The home introduced controls early and had arrangements for safer visits as restrictions eased.
“The registered manager implemented protocols before the government issued advice on restricting visitors to keep people safe.” from the report
Staff protection and training
Staff had training and protective equipment, and cleaning and infection-control measures had been increased.
“Staff were provided with the appropriate training and PPE to keep them and people safe.” from the report
Maintaining contact
When face-to-face visits were not possible, people were supported to keep in touch with relatives and advocates by telephone and video calls.
“When visits in person were not able to go ahead, people kept in touch with their relatives through video calls and telephone calls.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your infection-control arrangements changed since the inspection on 18 August 2020?
- 02How do you currently screen visitors and arrange visits safely?
- 03How do you make sure staff use personal protective equipment correctly and receive the right training?
- 04How often are people and staff tested, and what happens if someone tests positive?
- 05What are your current cleaning arrangements and how do you manage any infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not assess the other areas of care and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 September 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.
What inspectors found, May 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with staff supervision records not always kept as regularly as planned.
The inspection was unannounced and took place over 25 and 26 April 2018. One inspector spoke with four people, a family member, a healthcare professional, the registered manager and four staff. They reviewed care files, staff records, medicines, rotas, complaints and quality checks.
Inspectors found that people were safe and well cared for. Staff understood people's needs, medicines were administered safely, staffing levels were sufficient and the home was clean and well maintained. People had choices about food, activities and daily life, and were supported to stay independent.
Staff were described as kind, respectful and responsive. Care plans were detailed and updated when needs changed. Families were involved in decisions, and there were good links with healthcare professionals and the local community.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. This was the same overall rating as at the previous inspection, so the home remained Good.
Safe medicines
Inspectors found a good medicines system. Staff were trained and checked as competent, and people received medicines as prescribed.
“There was a good medication system in place and the records were of a good standard.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff used people's preferred ways of communicating and treated them with dignity and respect. People appeared relaxed and had confidence in staff.
“Staff demonstrated a strong person centred culture.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans contained useful information about people's histories, preferences and routines. Staff knew people well and responded to their individual needs.
“The support plans were detailed and informative and provided staff with the information they needed to support people correctly.” from the report
Good leadership
The registered manager was visible and available. The home used surveys and quality audits to check the service and make improvements.
“There was an effective quality assurance system in place.” from the report
Supervision records
minorStaff said they felt supported, but formal supervision had not taken place as regularly as the home's policy said it should. The registered manager recognised this and was working to improve the recording of discussions.
“Staff said they felt supported by the registered manager and supervision had taken place, however not as regularly as stated in the service's policy.” from the report
- 01How often are staff supervision meetings now held and recorded?
- 02How do you make sure care plans are updated when a person's needs or preferences change?
- 03How do you check that medicines continue to be given safely and as prescribed?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in decisions about their care?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, the premises and the care provided; all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 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 The Knoll
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 November 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
51 live-in carers within about an hour of Southend-on-Sea
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 £960 to £1,200 a week. 44 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
“She was always cheerful and looking for ways to stimulate my mother. She became her "friend" and provided best care always.”
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.