CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 10 High Street
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People received their medicines as prescribed. Inspectors found reviewed risk assessments, enough staff, safe recruitment and suitable infection prevention measures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not looked at during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not looked at during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not looked at during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Management systems had improved. Regular audits and a new electronic monitoring system helped identify and address shortfalls.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care and better management after earlier concerns about medicines and quality checks.
This was a focused inspection on 25 March 2021. Inspectors checked Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control. They observed care, spoke with relatives, staff and visiting professionals, and reviewed care and medicine records.
The home supported five people with learning disabilities, although it could accommodate up to eight. Inspectors found that people received their medicines as prescribed, risks were reviewed, staffing was sufficient and infection control arrangements were suitable.
The home had improved since the previous inspection in June 2019. New medicine checks and electronic quality monitoring had been introduced. The home was no longer in breach of the regulations identified at the previous inspection.
The overall rating was Good. Safe was rated Good and Well-led was rated Good. The other three key questions were not inspected during this visit, so their earlier ratings were used in the overall rating.
Medicines managed safely
Inspectors found that people received their medicines as prescribed. Records were checked twice daily and staff had up-to-date training.
“The registered manager had developed a robust new process and management system to ensure medicines were administered safely.” from the report
Risks were reviewed
Risk assessments covered personal, environmental and community risks. They were reviewed when people's needs changed.
“Risks to people's safety had been assessed and appropriate plans developed to manage them.” from the report
Enough trained staff
There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff had suitable training and agency workers knew the people living in the home.
“The service was fully staffed. Any use of agency staff was with staff who only worked at 10 High Street and knew the people who lived there.” from the report
Improved oversight
A new electronic system and regular audits helped managers find problems quickly and take action.
“There was a new electronic quality monitoring system in place, which had improved the overall monitoring and effectiveness of the service.” from the report
Respectful support
Inspectors found that staff protected people's dignity and privacy and supported people to have choice and control.
“Staff treated people in ways that maintained their dignity and privacy.” from the report
Feedback had reduced
minorSurveys and satisfaction feedback had reduced over the previous 18 months. The manager had restarted this process when inspectors visited.
“Surveys and satisfaction feedback was sought from people, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. This had reduced over the past 18 months, but the registered manager had begun the process again at the time of the inspection.” from the report
- 01How are medicine administration records checked now, and what happens if an error is found?
- 02How often are my relative's risk assessments reviewed, especially when their needs or behaviour changes?
- 03What activities and support are available to promote my relative's interests, interaction and motivation?
- 04How are relatives asked for feedback, and how is that feedback used to improve the service?
- 05Which ratings from the June 2019 inspection were carried forward because they were not reassessed?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; the other key-question ratings carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 May 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, July 2019
10 High Street rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, person-centred care but unsafe medicines records and weak quality checks.
This was an unannounced inspection on 11 and 17 June 2019. One inspector spoke with people, the manager and staff, and checked care, medicines and management records.
The home was rated Good for Effective, Caring and Responsive. People were treated kindly, supported to make choices, and helped to take part in activities and maintain relationships.
Safe and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. Medicines records had 21 missing entries in one month, some risk assessments were out of date or contradictory, and checks had not found these problems.
The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection to Requires Improvement. CQC asked for an action plan and said it would monitor progress and return for another inspection.
Kind and respectful support
Inspectors saw staff respond warmly to people and protect their dignity and privacy.
“We observed staff interacting with people in a friendly and respectful way.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, build skills and have as much control and independence as possible.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Trained staff
There were enough trained staff, with recruitment checks and regular supervision and appraisal.
“There were sufficient trained and experienced staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Personalised communication
Staff used methods such as sign language, pictures, symbols and communication boards to help people understand and express themselves.
“We observed staff using these different methods of communication throughout the inspection.” from the report
Medicine records
seriousMedicine administration records were incomplete on 21 occasions in the month before inspection. This meant it was not possible to be certain that medicines had been given as prescribed.
“The medicine administration records (MAR) for the month before the inspection had not been completed on 21 occasions.” from the report
Risk information
needs fixingRisk assessments were not reviewed on time and some contained contradictory information. This included information about staffing for community outings and a person's mobility.
“The assessments had dates when they needed to be reviewed, but these reviews had not happened on time.” from the report
Weak quality checks
seriousThe home's checks did not identify the missing medicine records, overdue risk reviews or a missed notification to CQC.
“The lack of effective governance systems increased the risk that shortfalls in the service would not be identified and improved.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to ensure every medicine given is recorded correctly?
- 02How are medicine records now checked, and what happens if an entry is missing?
- 03How are risk assessments kept up to date when a person's needs change?
- 04How have you made sure support plans no longer contain conflicting information?
- 05What action has been taken in response to the Regulation 17 breach, and when was the last quality check completed?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC key questions; Safe and Well-led deteriorated from Good, while the other three ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 July 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 10 High Street
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2021Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 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 two hours of Wiltshire
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 £1,340 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Linet became her carer and all changed, my daughter started eating, taking her medications and more important her happiness came back.”
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
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.