CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 222 Bills Lane
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and there were enough suitably skilled staff. Medicines were managed safely, but inspectors found exposed hot water pipes in the kitchen without a risk assessment; this was addressed immediately.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and support, including training about people's specific needs. People received support with food, health care, choices and the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, compassionate and respectful. They knew people's preferences, supported independence and helped people maintain relationships with family and friends.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and aspirations. People were supported to take part in activities, maintain relationships, use local amenities and receive sensitive end of life care.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers used audits and feedback to monitor the service and had made improvements to care planning. Inspectors found an open, person-centred culture and effective partnership working.
What inspectors found, December 2018
222 Bills Lane was rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with one kitchen safety risk dealt with during the visit.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 13 December 2018. Inspectors spoke with both people living there, staff, managers and a relative. They also checked care records, medicines, audits and health and safety records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were protected from abuse, received their medicines safely and had enough staff support. Staff understood people's needs and supported their choices, health, relationships and independence.
Inspectors found exposed hot water pipes in the kitchen where people could access them. There had not been a risk assessment for this. The manager completed one immediately and asked for urgent work to cover the pipes.
The home was still rated Good, as it had been at the February 2016 inspection. Inspectors found no serious risks or concerns and said improvements to care planning identified earlier had been made.
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people well and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect. They understood what could cause anxiety and how to provide emotional support.
“Staff knew people well. For example, they knew about people's preferences, what was important to people and how to motivate people in their day to day lives.” from the report
Personalised support
People helped shape their care plans and were supported to follow their interests, make choices and work towards their goals.
“People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Inspectors saw medicines being given safely and found regular checks, staff training and competency assessments.
“People received their prescribed medicines safely. We saw staff gave people their medicine in a safe way and as prescribed.” from the report
Good links with health services
Staff recognised people's health needs, sought medical help when needed and worked with health and social care professionals.
“There was good communication between staff and social and health care professionals, including a Speech and Language Therapist and Parkinson's Nurse who had regular input into people's care.” from the report
People's views were used
People, relatives, staff and other organisations were asked for feedback. Managers acted on feedback and had improved care planning.
“People who used the service were asked for their feedback and were encouraged to participate in the development of the service.” from the report
Exposed hot water pipes
needs fixingPeople could access exposed hot water pipes in the kitchen, and there was no risk assessment for this at the time of inspection. The manager completed a risk assessment immediately and requested urgent work to cover the pipes.
“However, we identified a risk within the kitchen in relation to exposed hot water pipes connected to the boiler.” from the report
Recruitment checks were not tested
minorThe manager said safe recruitment procedures were in place, but inspectors could not check the records because all staff had worked at the home for several years.
“We were unable to assess this during the inspection visit as all staff had worked at the service for a number of years.” from the report
- 01Has the urgent work to cover the exposed kitchen pipes been completed, and how is the area checked now?
- 02How would you assess whether my relative's needs fit with the needs of the people already living here?
- 03What training and competency checks will staff receive for my relative's particular health and support needs?
- 04How are people involved in decisions about new admissions to the home?
- 05What improvements have been made to care planning since the issues identified earlier in 2018?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the ratings remained Good from the February 2016 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 December 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 222 Bills Lane
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 April 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Solihull
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 £1,250 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.