Woodside Farm House
St Austell, PL25 · 2.2 km
Residential
Rated 4 years agocare home
CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Mr & Mrs D Evely
Averlea Residential Home
Fore Street, Polgooth, St Austell, PL26 7BP
Requires improvementpublished 27 June 2025, 14 months ago
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
The latest report, explained
What inspectors found, December 2023
Rated Inadequate and still in special measures; inspectors found some improvements but ongoing problems with staffing and oversight.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 08 November 2023. Two inspectors checked staffing, staff support, consent under the Mental Capacity Act, medicines and how the home was managed. They spoke with three residents, four staff members and the provider, observed care and reviewed records.
There had been some improvements since the previous inspection. Staff had completed important training, people were asked for consent before personal care, and medicines guidance had improved. However, inspectors found that there were not always enough staff to respond to people's requests, and one person's pain relief medicine was not recorded or given as prescribed.
The home remained in breach of Regulations 17 and 18. The overall rating stayed Inadequate and the home remained in special measures. Safe, Effective and Well-led were inspected but not re-rated, while the report does not give ratings for Caring or Responsive.
What inspectors praised
Staff training
Staff had completed training in areas the home identified as necessary, including safeguarding, health and safety and manual handling.
“All staff had completed training in areas identified as necessary for the service since the last inspection.” from the report
Consent
Inspectors found that people were asked for permission before personal care was provided. Care plans included consent forms.
“People were asked for their consent before personal care was provided.” from the report
Patient care
During lunchtime, inspectors saw staff supporting people in an unhurried and patient way.
“We observed staff supporting people at lunchtime. They were unhurried and patient in their approach.” from the report
Care planning
The home had information about people's health conditions, and risk assessments were updated after accidents or incidents.
“Following any accident or incident, risk assessments were updated to reflect people's needs.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
Staffing levels
seriousThere were not always enough staff to respond to requests for support. When two staff were needed for personal care, no staff might be available for anyone else at that time.
“There were not always enough staff to respond to people's requests for support.” from the report
Medicine recording
seriousInspectors found inconsistent recording for one person's pain relief patch. One dose was not given as prescribed, and another was given on the sixth day rather than the prescribed seventh day.
“Records showed one dose of this pain relief medicine had not been administered as prescribed.” from the report
Fire safety actions
seriousThe fire service had taken enforcement action after the previous inspection, but not all required actions were complete when inspectors visited.
“Not all the necessary actions had been completed at the time of this inspection.” from the report
Staff checks
needs fixingAlthough staff had completed training, the manager had not yet completed checks to confirm that staff were applying what they had learned. Supervision was not yet routinely planned for all staff.
“However, no competency checks had been completed to check staff were applying their learning effectively.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
- 01What staffing numbers and skills will be available on every shift, including when someone needs two staff for personal care?
- 02What checks now confirm that medicines, especially pain relief patches requiring stricter controls, are given and recorded correctly?
- 03Who provides senior oversight when the registered manager is away from work?
- 04How will you show that new governance systems are embedded and remain effective after outside quality support ends?
- 05Which fire safety actions remain outstanding, and when will each one be completed?
This was a targeted inspection of staffing, staff support, consent and management oversight, so it did not assess the full five key questions and did not change the previous ratings. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 December 2023 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.
An earlier report, explained
What inspectors found, October 2023
Averlea Residential Home was rated Inadequate and placed in special measures after inspectors found serious safety, staffing and leadership failures.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 5 September 2023. Two inspectors visited, spoke with people, relatives, staff and a professional, and reviewed care, medicine, staff and management records.
Inspectors found serious problems with medicines, staffing, training, fire safety, risk assessments, food and fluid monitoring, the building and legal consent. Records were often missing or incomplete. People had limited activities and interaction with staff.
The home was rated Inadequate for Safe, Effective and Well-led. The inspection did not assess Caring or Responsive. The overall rating changed from Good at the previous inspection, published on 2 April 2020, to Inadequate.
The service was placed in special measures. The CQC will monitor progress and asked for an action plan. It said further enforcement may follow if significant improvements are not made.
What inspectors praised
Recruitment checks
Inspectors found that recruitment included the required pre-employment checks before new staff started.
“Recruitment practices were thorough and included pre-employment checks from the Disclosure and Barring Service before new staff started work.” from the report
Some infection controls
Inspectors were assured about several infection control arrangements, including visitors, personal protective equipment and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Communication with relatives
Relatives told inspectors that communication about changes in their family member's needs was good.
“Relatives told us the registered manager communicated well with them and kept them up to date with any changes in their family member's needs.” from the report
Professional feedback
The professional feedback received by inspectors did not raise concerns about the service.
“Feedback from an external professional did not raise any concerns about the service.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
Medicines may not be given safely
seriousMedicine records had gaps, audits and competency checks had not been completed, and there was no clear guidance for some medicines given when needed.
“From these records, it was not always possible to tell whether the person had been given their medicines or not.” from the report
Too few staff and little training
seriousThere were two care staff for 12 people, with one newer staff member. Staff also had to carry out medicines, laundry and cleaning duties, while training and supervision were not up to date.
“This meant staff could not spend quality time with people or monitor them effectively in order to keep them safe.” from the report
Poor records and oversight
seriousThe home had not completed audits, accident records, body maps, staff supervision records or required notifications. This meant risks and repeated problems were not being identified.
“There were no records of the registered manager or provider undertaking any audits to monitor the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
Limited activities and interaction
needs fixingPeople had little interaction with staff and there were no records of individual activities. People told inspectors they wanted more to do and more opportunities to go out.
“People had little or no interaction with staff.” from the report
Building needed repair
needs fixingInspectors found torn and stained carpets, clutter, worn furniture and problems in bathrooms. A reported rat infestation had been dealt with, but one bedroom was awaiting refurbishment.
“The internal environment needed updating and attention.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
- 01What has changed since the inspection to make sure every medicine is recorded, checked and given as prescribed?
- 02How many trained care staff will be on each shift, and how will you make sure staff are not diverted to cooking, cleaning or other duties?
- 03Have fire drills, fire equipment checks and personal emergency evacuation procedures now been completed for every person?
- 04What current care plans and risk assessments are in place for falls, pressure areas, catheters, blood sugar, nutrition and hydration?
- 05How are you now checking consent and mental capacity before using bed rails, pressure mats, a locked front door or liquidised food?
This was a focused inspection prompted by concerns about care, premises and vermin, covering Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected during this visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 October 2023 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.
The story over the years
Every inspection of Averlea Residential Home
5 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Inadequate.
- December 2023Inadequatecurrent ratingstayed InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Inadequate
- October 2023Inadequatedown from Good
- April 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.
Another option
Or stay at home with a private carer
Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.
Nearby
Other care homes near St Austell
Good
Caprera
St Austell, PL25 · 2.2 km
ResidentialDementia
Rated 4 years agocare home
Copper Beeches Lodge
St Austell, PL25 · 2.2 km
ResidentialDementia
Rated 3 years agocare home
Wentworth Residential Home
St Austell, PL25 · 2.4 km
Residential
Rated 8 years agocare home
Trelowen
St Austell, PL25 · 2.5 km
Residential
Rated 8 months agoReport explained
Tregarne & Chy Koes Respite service
St Austell, PL25 · 2.8 km
Residential
Rated 8 years agocare home