CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Koppers Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Recruitment checks, staffing levels, risk assessments, fire safety, medicines and infection control were found to be well managed.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training, supervision and competency checks. People's care plans, nutrition, access to health professionals and support with choices were found to meet their needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and respectful. Inspectors found that people's dignity, privacy, independence and everyday choices were promoted.
- Responsive?
- Requires improvement
- This area was not covered by this focused inspection. Its previous rating was carried forward when the overall rating was calculated.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Quality checks had improved and were being used to identify risks and drive improvements. Staff and relatives described managers as approachable and supportive.
What inspectors found, October 2021
The Koppers Residential Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 23 August 2021. One inspector visited, spoke with people, staff, relatives and health professionals, observed care, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff on duty, safer recruitment, suitable training, safe medicines management, good infection control and respectful care. People's health, nutrition, choices and changing needs were being supported.
The previous inspection in June 2019 had rated the service Requires Improvement and found four breaches of legal requirements. At this inspection, the provider had made enough improvement and was no longer in breach of those regulations.
This was not a full review of every area of care. The inspection focused on Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. Ratings for areas not looked at were carried over from the earlier comprehensive inspection.
Safer recruitment and staffing
Inspectors found that recruitment checks were completed and that rotas showed safe staffing levels. Staff also had the training and experience needed for people's care.
“Staff had been safely recruited. Staff had pre-employment checks to check their suitability before they started working with people.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff took time to support people during meals and encouraged independence and choice.
“Staff addressed people respectfully and were kind, considerate and caring.” from the report
Safe medicines and infection control
Medicines were stored and given safely, with regular staff competency checks. Inspectors were assured that infection control, testing, PPE and visiting arrangements were suitable.
“Medicines were safely managed. Staff administering medicines received training and had their competency assessed every three months.” from the report
Improved management oversight
The provider had introduced stronger audits and checks. Managers monitored risks and took action where improvements were needed.
“Quality monitoring systems had improved and were effective.” from the report
Support for family contact
During the pandemic, staff helped people stay in touch with relatives and friends through different types of visits and calls. Visiting had resumed with safeguards.
“They offered window visits, video calls, phone calls and live-in stays and daily visits for people receiving end of life care.” from the report
Staffing pressures had occurred
minorThe manager reported staffing challenges and said staff had taken on extra duties when there were gaps. Inspectors still found that safe staffing levels were maintained at the inspection.
“The registered manager said there had been staffing challenges but praised their team for stepping in and undertaking additional duties when there were gaps in the rota.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure there are enough suitably skilled staff when there are gaps in the rota?
- 02How often are staff checked as competent to give medicines, and how are any medicine errors reviewed?
- 03How will my relative and our family be involved in creating and reviewing their care plan?
- 04What refurbishment work remains, and how will it affect residents?
- 05What is the current position on the Responsive area, which was not assessed in this inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led; Responsive was not assessed and ratings for areas not looked at were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 October 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 found good infection-control arrangements, with social-distancing practice needing improvement.
This was a targeted inspection on 27 November 2020. One inspector checked how the home prevented and controlled coronavirus infection during the pandemic.
Inspectors found good practice. Staff had infection-control training, used protective equipment correctly, and had regular testing. The home was clean, had enough protective equipment, and followed a cleaning schedule for frequently touched areas.
The home was assured to be managing visitors, admissions, testing, protective equipment and possible outbreaks safely. Inspectors discussed improving social distancing, and the registered manager made changes after the inspection.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Staff used protective equipment properly
Staff had received infection-control training and inspectors saw them using protective equipment correctly.
“Staff had received infection control training. Staff were seen using PPE correctly and in accordance with current guidance to minimise risks to people.” from the report
Good cleaning arrangements
The home was clean and had a schedule for cleaning frequently used areas and touch points at least three times a day.
“The home was clean with no unpleasant odours. There was a Covid-19 cleaning schedule in place.” from the report
Testing and safe admissions
People and staff were regularly tested. People returning from hospital were tested and isolated with a designated staff team.
“Staff and people were regularly tested in line with the government's current testing program.” from the report
Enough protective equipment
The home had enough protective equipment for its current needs and possible outbreaks.
“The provider had a sufficient supply of PPE to meet their current need and unforeseen outbreaks.” from the report
Social distancing needed improvement
needs fixingInspectors discussed ways to reduce the risk of infection by helping people to keep apart. The registered manager said changes would be made, and the report says changes were made after the inspection.
“We discussed looking at ways to limit the risk of cross infection at the home by supporting people to be able to social distance.” from the report
- 01What changes were made after the inspection to improve social distancing?
- 02How do staff now support people to keep an appropriate distance from one another?
- 03How often are frequently used areas and touch points cleaned now?
- 04How are people returning from hospital tested, isolated and supported?
- 05What is the home's current overall CQC rating, and have there been any later inspections?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 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 Koppers Residential Home
6 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The Koppers Residential Home →
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at The Koppers Residential Home →
- August 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 July 2012.
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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.