CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Alpine Villa Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found risks were identified and managed, staff understood safeguarding, recruitment checks were robust and there were enough staff. They noted that extra safeguards were needed for one person's arrangement allowing nominated staff to access their money.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors found good assessments, staff training, healthcare support and consent practices. However, some areas were cold, the smoking room affected others, medicine temperatures were not consistently recorded, and the lack of a passenger lift restricted access.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were described as kind, respectful and supportive. Inspectors saw a relaxed, family atmosphere and found that privacy, dignity, independence and involvement in decisions were promoted.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and reflected people's needs, preferences and communication styles. People were offered activities, outings and support to maintain relationships, although end of life plans did not yet include enough detail about preferences as health deteriorated.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager was involved day to day, promoted person-centred care and used audits, meetings and staff support sessions to monitor the service. People and relatives were regularly asked for their views, although some people felt resident meetings were not always valuable.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but Effective was Requires Improvement because the environment and medicine-temperature checks needed attention.
This was a planned, comprehensive inspection on 6 and 11 September 2019. One inspector and an Expert by Experience visited. They spoke with people, relatives, staff, the manager and the provider. They checked care records, medicines, staff files and management records, and contacted health and social care professionals.
People were generally safe, cared for kindly and supported in a personalised way. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine administration, clean areas, detailed care plans and good support with activities and healthcare. People and relatives were mostly positive about the home.
The Effective rating was Requires Improvement. Some areas were cold, the conservatory had become a smoking room that affected other people, and medicine storage temperatures were not recorded consistently. There were also concerns about access to first-floor bedrooms, some dietary choice, safeguards around one person's money and detail about end of life preferences.
The overall rating of Good means the home met the expected standard overall at this inspection. It does not mean everything was perfect. This was the first inspection after a change in legal entity.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw friendly, relaxed interactions and found that people's dignity and privacy were respected.
“The staff are always very caring and helpful. They're always asking you if you need anything, and if they can get you this or that.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's needs, preferences, communication methods and ways to reduce anxiety. Staff knew people well and supported choice in routines, meals and activities.
“Each person had a detailed care plan. The information reflected the person's needs and how best to support them.” from the report
Good activities and social support
People were offered group and individual activities, outings and involvement in daily tasks. Social activity plans used pictures and photographs to reflect personal interests.
“Each person had a social activity plan in place. These had been creatively developed and showed the person's preferences and what they liked to do.” from the report
Clean and well-maintained home
Inspectors found all areas clean, including less visible areas, with no unpleasant odours. Equipment was regularly tested or serviced and infection control training and audits were in place.
“The home, including less visible areas were clean and there were no unpleasant odours.” from the report
Supportive leadership and training
The manager was closely involved and showed a strong commitment to learning. Staff said they received substantial training and felt well supported.
“The registered manager was passionate about training and were always looking at new courses staff could attend.” from the report
Cold areas and smoking room
needs fixingSome areas were cold until staff adjusted the heating after a concern was raised. The conservatory had become a smoking room, restricting other people's access and exposing them to smoke. Inspectors recommended that heating and smoking arrangements be reviewed and monitored.
“We recommend the temperature of the home and smoking arrangements be reviewed and monitored, to ensure people were comfortable.” from the report
Medicine storage temperature records
needs fixingMedicine systems were otherwise safe, but the temperature of the medicine storage area was not recorded every day. This could affect whether medicines remained effective.
“However, the temperature of the area, which housed the medicines, had not been consistently taken each day.” from the report
Stairs and access
needs fixingThere was no passenger lift, so first-floor bedrooms could not be used by everyone and falling risk could increase as people's mobility changed. The manager said plans had been drawn up to install a lift.
“The bedrooms on the first floor were accessed by a flight of stairs as the home did not have passenger lift.” from the report
Incomplete end of life planning
minorCare plans recorded some funeral wishes, but did not explain people's preferences as their health deteriorated. The manager said this would be addressed.
“However, there was no detail about people's preferences as their health deteriorated.” from the report
Extra safeguards around money
needs fixingOne person had agreed that nominated staff could access their money for shopping. Inspectors accepted that the person had capacity and wanted this, but said extra safeguards were needed and the arrangement should be reviewed.
“Whilst the person had capacity and wanted this arrangement, additional safeguards were needed to ensure further safety.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to the heating arrangements, and how do you now monitor temperatures in all areas?
- 02Is the conservatory still used as a smoking room, and how do you protect other people from smoke and keep the room available to them?
- 03Are medicine storage temperatures now recorded every day, and what action is taken if a temperature is outside the required range?
- 04Has the planned passenger lift been installed, and how do you decide whether a person can safely use a first-floor bedroom?
- 05How are residents' wishes about care and treatment as their health deteriorates recorded in their end of life plans?
This was a planned comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, and it was the first inspection after a change in legal entity. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 October 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 Alpine Villa Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- October 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 September 2018.
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.