CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Aire View Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, September 2019
Aire View Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, but some records needed updating.
This was an unannounced inspection over 3 and 5 September 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They reviewed care plans, medicine records, staff files, complaints, safeguarding records and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine arrangements, kind and respectful care, suitable activities and good access to food, drink and healthcare.
There were some areas to improve. Care plans did not always reflect people's current needs. Records about some medicines, staff appraisals and legal authority for relatives giving consent also needed attention. The manager acted on several issues during the inspection, and CQC made a recommendation about care planning.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives gave consistently positive feedback about staff. Inspectors saw warm relationships and respectful care.
“People received care and support from staff who were friendly and caring.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's care and support needs. Call bells were usually answered promptly.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to ensure people received appropriate care and support.” from the report
Food and mealtimes
People received enough food and drink. Meals were home cooked, well presented and served in a relaxed way.
“All meals were home cooked, of good quality and were well presented.” from the report
Activities and environment
People could take part in a range of activities and use a large, accessible garden. The home was also being adapted to support people living with dementia.
“People had access to a varied programme of activities.” from the report
Visible management
The management team knew people and their needs. Audits and action plans were used to monitor the service and identify improvements.
“Quality assurance systems were in place which ensured the service was monitored and any risks were identified.” from the report
Care plans were not always current
needs fixingSome care plans lacked important details or had not been updated after people's needs changed. The manager put actions in place, and CQC recommended a review of the care planning process.
“Care plans were mostly person centred, but some areas would benefit from further detail or an update.” from the report
Some medicine records needed improvement
needs fixingThe electronic system did not always show when drinks had been thickened or where medicine patches had previously been placed. The manager changed or planned changes to the recording systems.
“The electronic MAR did not allow staff to record each time a fluid thickener was added to a person's drink, making it unclear when drinks were thickened correctly.” from the report
Staff appraisals were behind
minorThe manager said staff appraisals were slightly overdue. There was a plan to address this.
“The registered manager told us they were a little behind with staff appraisals but had plans in place to address this shortfall.” from the report
Consent records needed clearer evidence
needs fixingSome relatives had given consent for a person, but records did not show whether they had the proper legal authority to do so. The manager said more information would be obtained where needed.
“Some relatives had given consent on behalf of a person, but records did not show if the appropriate legal authority was in place for them to do this.” from the report
- 01How have you made sure every person's care plan reflects their current physical, mental, emotional and social needs?
- 02How do you now record fluid thickener and the position of medicine patches?
- 03Have all staff appraisals that were behind at the inspection now been completed?
- 04How do you check that relatives giving consent have the appropriate legal authority?
- 05What changes have been made to the dementia-friendly environment since the inspection?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions; the overall rating remained Good, and the well-led rating improved from Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 September 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.
What inspectors found, March 2017
Rated Good overall, but inspectors found the home needed to improve its management records and oversight.
This was an unannounced inspection on 27 February and 6 March 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, visitors, staff and health professionals. They also checked care plans, medicine records and management documents.
Inspectors found people were generally safe and received enough care from trained staff. Medicines were mostly managed safely, people had access to health professionals, and their food and drink needs were met.
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Care plans included personal information and activities were available, although some plans were too general. Complaints were investigated and answered appropriately.
The overall rating was Good. The home was rated Good in four areas, but Requires Improvement for being well-led because some audits, care records, evacuation plans and medicine guidance needed strengthening.
People felt safe
People and relatives generally said they felt safe. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, enough staff and safe recruitment checks.
“People who used the service told us they felt safe with the care they were provided with.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people's likes and dislikes and usually treated them with patience, dignity and respect.
“Staff had developed good relationships with the people who used the service and knew how to meet their individual needs.” from the report
Improved medicines practice
Inspectors found improvements since the previous inspection. Medicines were generally stored, administered and recorded safely.
“At this inspection we checked and found improvements had been made, sufficient to meet regulations around medicines.” from the report
Activities and complaints
People could join a range of activities in the home and local community. Complaints were recorded, investigated and answered within the home's stated timescales.
“We looked at the management of complaints and found these were appropriately responded to.” from the report
Incomplete medicine records
needs fixingSome medicine records had gaps, and the records did not always say who might have been affected or what action was taken. Guidance for variable-dose and as-needed medicines was also incomplete.
“The registered provider carried out daily checks, although where gaps had already been identified, the details of who this may have affected were not recorded and the action taken in response was also not stated.” from the report
Emergency plans needed more detail
needs fixingPersonal evacuation plans needed clearer information about the support each person would need in an emergency.
“Although these needed some further work to make sure appropriate support levels were recorded and staff understood people's needs.” from the report
Care plans were sometimes too general
needs fixingSome plans did not give enough specific guidance about how people wished to be supported. Some assessment and dietary records were also incomplete.
“We found at times the plans were generalised and did not always provide detailed guidance on how people wished to be supported.” from the report
Quality checks did not track actions clearly
needs fixingAudits identified actions, but records did not clearly show who was responsible or when actions should be completed. This led to the Requires Improvement rating for well-led.
“We noted it was not clear who was responsible for completing the identified actions and what date these needed to be completed.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that medicine administration times, missed signatures and as-needed medicine instructions are recorded correctly?
- 02Have all personal emergency evacuation plans been updated to show the support each person needs?
- 03How do you make sure care plans give specific guidance rather than saying only that someone needs full assistance?
- 04How do you record and monitor personal care, dietary needs and prescribed exercise?
- 05When an audit identifies an action, who is responsible for it and how do you confirm that it has been completed?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, and inspectors checked care, medicines, staffing, records, activities, complaints and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 March 2017 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 Aire View Care Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- September 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 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 an hour of Leeds
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. 89 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.