CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 1-2 Prior's Court Cottages
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found detailed risk plans, safe medicines systems, suitable staffing and a safe response during a real fire alarm.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training, supervision and competency checks to support people with complex needs. The home worked with health professionals and supported people with nutrition, exercise and independence.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were supported to express their views, make choices and maintain relationships.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was highly personalised and helped reduce anxiety, support communication and enable people to take part in activities, education, work and community life. One formal complaint since the previous inspection had been resolved.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers were visible and approachable, and quality checks and risk management were described as robust. The home involved people and families in reviews and service improvements.
What inspectors found, August 2023
1-2 Prior's Court Cottages was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and highly personalised care, with end-of-life wishes not yet fully explored.
The inspection took place on 26 May 2023. One inspector and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and professionals. They observed care, activities, a fire evacuation and a bike ride, and checked care records, medicines, incidents and quality checks.
The home supports up to six autistic young adults aged 18 to 25, with associated complex needs. Inspectors found that staff knew people well, understood their communication and support needs, and promoted choice, independence and meaningful activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. These ratings were unchanged from the previous inspection, published in 2018. The report says people's outcomes were consistently good and that the home was consistently managed.
Personalised support
Staff adapted their communication, tone, physical contact and personal space to each person. This helped people take part in activities and access the community.
“Support and care provided by staff was highly personalised.” from the report
Autism expertise
Staff understood people's autism, triggers, communication and complex needs. Training and support plans helped staff provide consistent care.
“People were supported by staff who understood best practice in relation to the wide range of strengths, impairments or sensitivities of autistic people.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make decisions, try new experiences and develop life skills. Restrictions were reviewed and kept to the least restrictive level.
“Staff clearly understood how to promote people's choice, independence and freedoms in their everyday lives.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors observed warm and respectful interactions. Families and professionals also described the care as caring and compassionate.
“We observed people consistently received kind and compassionate care from staff who used positive, respectful language, which people understood and responded well to.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked with health and social care professionals and involved families in assessments, care planning and improvements.
“People, relatives and relevant health and social care professionals told us they were fully involved working in partnership to assess people's needs and develop their support plans.” from the report
End-of-life wishes
minorNo one was receiving or expected to need end-of-life care soon, so people's wishes on this subject had not yet been fully explored. Families may want to ask how and when this will be addressed.
“Due to the sensitive nature of the subject and the complex needs of people, their wishes had not yet been fully explored.” from the report
- 01How will you assess whether your staff's autism training and communication approach match my relative's individual needs?
- 02What restrictions, if any, might be used for my relative, and how will you review whether they can be reduced?
- 03How will my family be involved in care planning, health decisions and reviews?
- 04How will you explore and record my relative's end-of-life wishes, including any communication or cultural needs?
- 05How would you support my relative to take part in education, work, activities and community life?
This was a full inspection covering the premises and care provided, with ratings given for all five key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 August 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.
What inspectors found, June 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with one medicines instruction needing more detail.
This was a comprehensive, announced inspection on 10 May 2018. One inspector reviewed information held by CQC, spoke with managers and staff, observed people and care, spoke with four parents, and examined care plans, recruitment, training and medicines records.
The home supported up to six young adults with autism. Five people were living there at the inspection. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with respect and supported by staff who understood their individual needs and communication methods.
Care was well planned and included healthcare, activities, learning and supported employment. The home also planned transitions carefully. One medicines instruction needed more detail, but inspectors found no medicines errors since the previous inspection.
The overall rating was Good, and all five areas were rated Good. This was unchanged from the previous inspection. Inspectors found no serious risks or concerns from this inspection or their ongoing monitoring.
Individual choice
Staff supported people to make choices and have control over their lives. Support was intended to be as least restrictive as possible.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.” from the report
Understanding autism
Staff knew how autism affected each person and used individual communication methods consistently. Care plans explained how to support each person's behaviour and choices.
“Staff understood the impact of their autism on each person and responded to their individual needs consistently.” from the report
Healthcare
Inspectors found that medical conditions were managed very well. Epilepsy care was well documented, and technology was used where needed to help keep people safe.
“Healthcare was very good and medical conditions were managed very well using appropriate technology where necessary to keep people safe.” from the report
Transitions
Moves into and out of the home were planned carefully and adjusted when needed. Staff sometimes moved with people to provide continuity.
“People's transitions in and out of the service were extremely well planned and supported to try to give them the best chance of success.” from the report
Activities and opportunities
People could take part in activities, holidays, learning, supported employment and projects designed to build work skills.
“People had wide ranging opportunities for involvement in activities, holidays and supported employment.” from the report
One medicines instruction
needs fixingOne instruction for a medicine given when needed did not explain clearly enough what severe agitation meant for that person. This could make the direction less clear for staff.
“although in one case, additional information defining the meaning of 'severe agitation' for the person, was needed.” from the report
Staff vacancies
minorThe home had staff vacancies and was continuing to recruit. Inspectors found that staffing levels were reviewed and changed when people's needs changed.
“Although the service had staff vacancies the provider had an ongoing recruitment programme to identify people with the right skills and approach.” from the report
Gathering people's views
minorThe home found it difficult to obtain people's views about their experience of care. Inspectors said more work was needed, although some focused work had started.
“Obtaining the views of people supported about their experience of their care had proved challenging, and further development was needed in this area.” from the report
- 01How has the medicines instruction about 'severe agitation' been clarified since the inspection?
- 02How many staff vacancies are there now, and how do you make sure staffing is sufficient for each person's needs?
- 03How do you gather and act on the views of people who cannot communicate verbally?
- 04How are behaviour support plans reviewed, and how are families involved in those reviews?
- 05How would you plan and support a move into or out of the home?
This was an announced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 June 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 1-2 Prior's Court Cottages
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 August 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
42 live-in carers within about an hour of West Berkshire
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 36 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“Titus has compassion, patience, a great sense of humour and a very professional attitude.”
“Barbara treated my mother-in-law with enormous love and compassion and provided an environment where she could feel safe and seen”
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.