CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Tonbridge House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about the use of protective equipment, testing, cleaning, visitor checks, isolation plans and infection control policies. They did not give a Safe rating.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and support for family contact.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 15 March 2021. It focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than a full assessment of the home.
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, arranged testing, kept the building clean, and had plans to prevent or manage outbreaks. Visitors were screened, tested and supported to clean their hands before entering.
People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends by phone, online and through carefully arranged visits. Staff also supported activities to help people's welfare and stimulation.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report gives information about infection control at that visit, but does not give an overall quality rating.
Family contact
Staff supported people to stay in touch with relatives and friends through telephone, internet and different types of visits.
“People were well supported by staff to have telephone and internet contact with their family and friends.” from the report
Protective equipment
Protective equipment was readily available, and staff were observed using it correctly. Its use was regularly checked.
“Staff were seen to use PPE appropriately and the use of PPE was regularly audited by the registered manager and home trainer.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors were screened, had their temperature checked and took a lateral flow test before entering.
“Visitors were asked screening questions, had temperature checks and were supported to wash and sanitise their hands when they arrived.” from the report
Clean environment
The building was clean and uncluttered, with regular cleaning planned for areas that people often touched.
“The building was clean and free from clutter, there were schedules in place for regular cleaning of high touch areas.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently supporting residents to keep in touch with family and friends?
- 02How do you currently screen and test visitors before they enter the home?
- 03How often are high-touch areas cleaned, and how is this checked?
- 04What arrangements are in place to isolate someone with COVID-19 or manage an outbreak?
- 05Which areas of care and management were not covered by this targeted inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only, so the home was not given an overall rating or ratings for the other key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 April 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, November 2018
Tonbridge House Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with one medicines error and some food and fluid records not always completed.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 17 October 2018. Inspectors reviewed care records, medicines, staff files, complaints, accidents, audits and the building. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers, and observed care.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe recruitment, good infection control and a clean, well-maintained environment.
People were treated kindly and with respect. Their care plans were personal and regularly reviewed. People received suitable food, drinks, healthcare and activities, and relatives said they felt welcome and listened to.
There was one medicines recording error involving a liquid medicine that was used beyond its discard date. The manager acted straight away, and inspectors also noted that food and fluid charts were not always completed, although they found no impact on people's health.
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and inspectors saw warm, caring interactions. People's privacy, dignity and independence were supported.
“Staff knew people well and interacted with people in a caring and respectful manner.” from the report
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough suitable staff to meet people's needs. The home did not need to use agency staff.
“There were enough suitable staff available to meet people's needs.” from the report
Good dementia-friendly environment
The purpose-built home had accessible facilities and features designed to help people with dementia stay independent and find their way around.
“The décor was suitable for people with dementia and those with visual problems.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included detailed information about communication, health needs and personal history. They were reviewed when people's needs changed.
“People's care plans contained person centred information, for example the need to approach a person from the left as they are hard of hearing in their right ear.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could take part in activities they enjoyed in the home and locally. The home was developing links with local groups and services.
“People were supported to take part in activities they liked within and outside of the home.” from the report
Management oversight
Managers used audits, incident reviews, complaints and feedback to monitor the home and make improvements.
“The registered manager promoted continuous learning by reviewing audit action plans, complaints, promoting feedback and analysing accidents and incidents.” from the report
Medicine expiry recording
needs fixingOne liquid medicine was given for four weeks after it should have been discarded because the expiry date had been recorded incorrectly. The manager acted immediately, and the pharmacy advised there would be no adverse effect.
“There was one error of a liquid medication where the date it was opened was recorded and an expiry date of three months later was entered.” from the report
Food and fluid records
minorFood and fluid charts were not always completed. Inspectors found no impact on people's health because weights were stable and risks were otherwise managed.
“These stated there should be food and fluid charts but these were not always completed.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that liquid medicines are discarded on time after opening?
- 02How do you make sure food and fluid charts are completed when they are needed?
- 03How are my relative's dementia, communication needs and personal history recorded and shared with staff?
- 04What activities are currently available inside and outside the home?
- 05How will you involve me in care reviews and tell me about any changes or incidents?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the care provided, accommodation, medicines, staffing, records and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 November 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 Tonbridge House Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 May 2018.
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.