CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 61 Kings Road Harrogate
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, July 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, person-centred care but gaps in safety, records and legal safeguards.
Inspectors visited unannounced on 10 and 16 May 2022. They spoke with three people using the home, four relatives and six staff. They reviewed care, medicines, staff and management records.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff supported choice, independence, communication, activities and contact with family. The home was clean, and infection prevention arrangements were effective.
However, records did not always describe people's needs or the support required. Medicines were not always managed safely. Staffing was reduced at evenings and weekends, and some people did not have the required legal safeguards when their liberty was restricted.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. This means some aspects were not always safe, effective or well-led, and the report identified an increased risk that people could be harmed. Caring and Responsive were rated Good.
Kind and respectful care
People received compassionate care and staff respected their privacy, dignity and individuality. Staff knew people well and supported them to make choices.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Activities and community life
People had access to a day service, paid employment and activities that helped develop skills, independence and social connections.
“The provider had created a day service and a range of activities including paid employment to enrich people's lives, build on skills and independence and enable social interaction with peers.” from the report
Accessible communication
Information was available in formats people could understand, including audio and braille. Communication plans described people's preferred methods and signs of distress.
“People had access to information in formats they could understand.” from the report
Clean and infection-controlled home
The home was clean and hygienic. Staff used protective equipment safely and the service had arrangements for preventing and managing infections.
“The service used effective infection, prevention and control measures to keep people safe, and staff supported people to follow them.” from the report
Incomplete care and risk records
seriousCare records and monitoring records did not always describe people's needs accurately or explain how support should be provided. Inspectors highlighted a significant risk of harm if one person's complex diet was not managed correctly.
“Records were not always up to date, complete or reflective of people's needs.” from the report
Missing liberty safeguards
seriousA person who was deprived of their liberty did not have the required authorisation in place. The provider later made relevant applications and arranged further training.
“People who were deprived of their liberty and required an authorisation did not have one in place at the time of the inspection.” from the report
Reduced evening and weekend staffing
needs fixingStaffing was significantly reduced after 4pm and at weekends. Inspectors found this limited flexibility for activities and outings and recommended that staffing levels be reviewed.
“Staffing levels were not sufficient to allow flexibility around activities and outings.” from the report
Weak quality checks
seriousManagement checks did not always find or address problems quickly. The provider had not maintained complete records or properly assessed, monitored and improved the service.
“The provider failed to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
- 01What has changed since the inspection to make sure care plans and risk records fully describe each person's needs, including complex dietary requirements?
- 02How are medicines records and storage checked now, and how will you show that all medicines are managed safely?
- 03Have all required liberty authorisations now been applied for and granted, and what training do staff receive on mental capacity and liberty safeguards?
- 04How many staff are on duty after 4pm and at weekends, and how does this affect activities, outings and one-to-one support?
- 05What action has been taken in response to the Regulation 17 breach, and how are managers checking that improvements are working?
This was an unannounced first inspection of the newly registered service, covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control arrangements. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 July 2022 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 61 Kings Road Harrogate
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- July 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 December 2020.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of North Yorkshire
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 £1,010 to £1,290 a week. 27 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.