CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Limes
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, September 2018
Rated Good overall, but inspectors found medicines and some safety checks needed improvement.
Inspectors visited without notice on 9 August 2018 and returned on 10 August. They observed care, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care, medicines, risk and other records.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were rated Good. Safe was rated Requires Improvement because medicines were not always stored, recorded or given safely. Some care records and risk assessments also lacked enough detail.
People and relatives described kind, familiar staff and said people felt safe. The manager acted during and after the inspection on several issues, including medicine storage, medicine guidance, alarm mats and food choices.
Kind and familiar staff
People and relatives consistently described staff as caring, respectful and well known to the people they supported.
“People and relatives were very complimentary and satisfied with the quality of care provided at the home.” from the report
Food and hydration support
Staff understood nutritional risks and monitored people who were at risk of losing weight or not drinking enough.
“There was a strong emphasis on people eating and drinking well.” from the report
Activities and interests
People were offered activities and support to pursue hobbies and interests, including individual support for someone who chose not to join group activities.
“The provider continued to be responsive to people's needs and people were occupied and stimulated with a variety of activities and events.” from the report
Medicines were not consistently safe
seriousSome medicines were stored at unsafe temperatures. There were missing PRN instructions, incomplete patch records and problems using the electronic medicine system.
“Systems to ensure safe management of medicines were not always followed in line with current guidance and the provider's own policies.” from the report
Some care plans lacked detail
needs fixingRisk assessments and care plans did not always explain clearly how staff should respond to falls or reflect changes in people's abilities.
“Although care records had not always been updated when people's abilities changed, staff knew people's needs.” from the report
Some call responses were delayed
needs fixingStaff were usually available, but inspectors saw occasions when they were busy and could not respond immediately. One call bell was not answered during the four minutes it was observed.
“However, staff were sometimes very busy and there were occasions when they were not able to respond immediately to requests for assistance.” from the report
Audits missed problems
minorQuality checks did not identify several issues, and one medicine recording problem appeared in two audits without evidence of follow-up.
“At this inspection we saw some detailed audits and checks to monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to medicine storage, temperature checks and the electronic medicine recording system?
- 02How are PRN medicines and pain-relief patches now checked and recorded?
- 03How do you test alarm mats and other equipment to make sure they connect to the call alarm system?
- 04How are care plans updated when a person's mobility, continence or falls risk changes?
- 05How do you check that medicine and care-plan audits lead to timely action?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, using observations, discussions and checks of care, medicine, risk and other records. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 September 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 Limes
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 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 Warwickshire
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 £1,260 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“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.