CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 1 St Alphege Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were supported to understand risks and stay safe. Staff were trained in safeguarding, and medicines were given by trained and competent staff.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were regularly reassessed and staff had training related to the people they supported. Staff worked with health professionals, including to help one person manage diabetes.
- Caring?
- Good
- People said staff were kind, caring and helpful. People planned their own care, had their privacy respected and were supported to make choices and build independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was planned around people's preferences and interests. People were supported to take part in activities, maintain relationships and raise concerns through an accessible complaints procedure.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager was described as approachable and supportive. Audits were completed, shortfalls were followed up and learning was shared with staff and people.
What inspectors found, June 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no breaches reported.
This was an unannounced inspection on 20 May 2019. One inspector reviewed care records, accident and incident records, medicines information, surveys and quality checks. They spoke with three people, staff, the manager and four health and social care professionals.
The home supports five people with mental health needs. Some people also have learning disabilities or health needs such as diabetes. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and involved in decisions about their care.
People were supported to manage risks, medicines, food and health conditions. They were encouraged to be independent and to take part in activities they enjoyed. The home also learned from mistakes, including reducing medicines errors after changing where medicines were stored.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found legal requirements were met and that people's outcomes and experiences were consistently good. The rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published in November 2016.
Staff know people well
The long-standing staff team understood people's needs. People described staff as kind, caring and helpful.
“People were supported by a long-standing staff team who knew them well and understood their needs.” from the report
Positive risk taking
People were involved in deciding what risks they wanted to take. Staff helped them find safer ways to do things rather than simply stopping them.
“Positive risk taking was encouraged and people were involved in assessing risks and planning how to minimise them.” from the report
Health support
Staff worked with health professionals and helped people understand and manage their health conditions. This included supporting one person to bring their blood sugar levels under control.
“The person now had their blood sugar levels under control and was happy to accept tests and treatment as required.” from the report
Learning from mistakes
The home reviewed incidents and changed its medicines arrangements after errors were linked to staff being distracted. Inspectors said the number of errors had reduced.
“The medicines were moved to a dedicated area in a quieter part of the service and as a result the number of errors has reduced.” from the report
Registered manager application pending
minorThere was no manager registered with CQC at the time of the inspection. An application had been submitted and was being processed.
“The service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
- 01What is the current position of the application for a manager to be registered with CQC?
- 02How do you involve a new resident in assessing risks and agreeing positive risk-taking plans?
- 03What medicines errors have occurred recently, and how do you check that the changes to medicines storage are still working?
- 04How would you support my relative to manage their particular mental health or physical health needs?
- 05How do you keep offering activities when someone initially declines to take part?
This was a scheduled, unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; the previous rating was Good and the home remained Good in all areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 June 2019 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 2016
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but identified safety checks that needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 3 and 7 October 2016. Two inspectors met four residents, spoke with two residents, the registered manager and four staff, and observed care. They checked care plans, medicines records, staff files, risk assessments, audits and rotas.
The home supported up to five people with mental health support needs. Inspectors rated all five areas Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. They found enough trained staff, safe medicines management, good support from health professionals, respectful relationships and care that reflected people's choices and interests.
There were some issues to put right. The bath water had repeatedly been above the safe limit, one person did not have a personal emergency evacuation plan, and records did not show what changes had been made to some care plans. Staff adjusted the bath tap valves after the inspection, and the manager gave further information about how risks were being managed.
Kind and respectful staff
People had warm relationships with staff. Staff listened, offered reassurance and respected privacy, dignity and personal choices.
“People were treated with dignity and respect by staff.” from the report
Personalised support
People helped write their care plans and were supported to choose activities, hobbies, meals and how they spent their time.
“People were encouraged and supported to express their views and be involved in planning their own care.” from the report
Good staffing and training
Inspectors found enough trained staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks and induction arrangements were in place.
“There was always enough trained staff on duty to meet people's needs.” from the report
Health and medicines support
Medicines records were clear and complete. Staff worked with health professionals and supported people to manage their physical and mental health.
“Records were kept of all medicine that had been administered.” from the report
Emergency evacuation plan missing
needs fixingOne person did not have a personal emergency evacuation plan. The fire risk assessment also needed updating for new residents.
“Not everyone had a personal emergency evacuation plan in case of a fire.” from the report
Care plan changes not recorded
needs fixingCare plans had been updated, but the records did not say what had changed, when the change was made or who made it.
“There was no record of what changes were made, when or by whom, this was an area for improvement.” from the report
Medicine key security
needs fixingSome staff took medicines cupboard keys home. The manager agreed to review this because the keys could be lost.
“The registered manager agreed to review the security of the medicines keys as there was a risk of losing them.” from the report
- 01What action has been taken to keep the bath water at a safe temperature, and how is this checked now?
- 02Does every resident now have a personal emergency evacuation plan, and has the fire risk assessment been updated?
- 03How are changes to care plans recorded, including what changed, when and by whom?
- 04How are medicines cupboard keys kept secure when staff finish their shifts?
- 05How are residents and relatives involved in reviewing care plans and giving feedback about the home?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, with the previous inspection in July 2014 also rated Good in all areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 November 2016 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 1 St Alphege Road
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 December 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
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.