CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 122 Aldenham Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found good systems for medicines, safeguarding, risk management, fire safety and infection control. They noted recent medicines errors, followed by refresher training and competency checks for staff.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received suitable training and support, including help with eating, consent, mobility and health appointments. Staff worked with health professionals and other agencies.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Staff knew people well, respected privacy and choices, and encouraged independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised to people's communication, routines, interests, faith and health needs. People could choose activities and had information about how to complain.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found supportive management, good team work, regular meetings and audits. People, relatives and staff were involved in giving feedback and discussing the service.
What inspectors found, April 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some recent staff shortages and medicines errors being managed.
This was a fully comprehensive, announced inspection on 11 March 2019. One inspector reviewed information held by the CQC, spoke with four people, two relatives, three staff and the manager, and checked care plans, medicines records, risk assessments, complaints and audits.
The home supported six people with learning and/or physical disabilities. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with respect and supported to make choices, stay independent, eat food they liked and take part in activities. Staff supported people to access health professionals and worked with other agencies.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. This means the inspectors found the legal requirements were met and that people's outcomes were consistently good. The home was also rated Good at the previous inspection in March 2016.
Kind relationships
People liked living in the home and staff treated them with respect. Inspectors saw warm relationships and attentive support.
“There were clearly good relationships between people and staff and staff knew people well.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in care planning and could choose their food, activities and how to spend their time. Staff encouraged people to do things for themselves.
“People were encouraged in their independence.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff adapted care to individual needs, including communication, mobility, anxiety, faith and food preferences. Changes to one person's routine helped reduce the need for as-required medicines.
“People received responsive care from staff.” from the report
Safe systems
The home had clear arrangements for medicines, risks, safeguarding, emergencies and infection control. Medicines records were complete during the inspection.
“There were no gaps on MARs which indicated people had not missed their medicines.” from the report
Health support
People were supported to access a range of health professionals, including doctors, dentists, opticians and hospital services.
“People received support from staff to access healthcare professionals when needed.” from the report
Staff shortages
needs fixingThe manager and staff said the home was going through a period of staff shortages because some staff had left. They said there had been no impact on people's support, and recruitment was ongoing.
“The registered manager and staff told us they were going through a period of staff shortages as some staff had recently left.” from the report
Recent medicines errors
seriousTwo medicines errors had happened within a short period before the inspection. The home responded with refresher training and competency checks, and inspectors found medicines management was good at the visit.
“For example, two medicines errors had occurred within a short time of each other.” from the report
- 01How have the staff shortages changed since the inspection, and are there enough staff for people to continue their preferred activities?
- 02What checks are now in place to prevent another medicines error?
- 03How will you learn about and support my relative's individual routines, interests, communication and goals?
- 04How are people and relatives involved in reviewing care plans and raising concerns?
- 05How will you support my relative to access the health professionals and activities they need?
This was a fully comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the CQC looked at both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 April 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.
Every inspection of 122 Aldenham Road
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Hertfordshire
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 £1,300 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.