CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Apple Orchard
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was using safe infection prevention and control procedures. They found appropriate cleaning, ventilation, protective equipment, testing and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed safely.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 13 January 2021. It was carried out because of the COVID-19 pandemic and focused on infection prevention and control.
Inspectors found that the home was regularly cleaned and well ventilated. Staff used protective equipment properly, and people and staff were tested for COVID-19 in line with national guidance.
The home supported people to keep in touch with relatives and to continue activities, including art sessions and exercise. It also had a plan for possible staff shortages during an infection outbreak.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other four areas.
Clean and ventilated environment
The home was regularly cleaned and had adequate ventilation. New communal-room furniture could also be cleaned easily.
“Staff ensured the service was regularly cleaned and the environment was adequately ventilated.” from the report
Protective equipment and testing
Staff had relevant infection prevention training and used the protective equipment provided appropriately. People and staff were tested for COVID-19 in line with national guidance.
“Staff had received relevant training in infection prevention and control and used the PPE provided appropriately.” from the report
Keeping people connected
People were supported to stay in touch with relatives by telephone and internet, and to remain involved in activities.
“People were well supported by staff to have telephone and internet contact with their relatives.” from the report
Planning for outbreaks
The home had a plan to manage possible staff shortages during an infection outbreak and had shared experience with another local care provider.
“The service had a plan in place to manage any staff shortages during an outbreak of infection.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your infection prevention and control arrangements changed since the inspection on 13 January 2021?
- 02How do you currently test people and staff, and how would you manage a new infection outbreak?
- 03What is your current plan if there are staff shortages during an outbreak?
- 04How will you help my relative keep in contact with family if visits are restricted?
- 05What activities are currently available, including activities outside the home?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other four areas were not covered. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 January 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, March 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but records for some extra medicines were not always complete.
This was an unannounced inspection on 18 March 2019. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, staff and managers. They reviewed care and staff records, medicines, incidents, complaints, training and quality checks.
The home supported nine adults with a learning disability, although it could support up to ten people. Inspectors found enough staff, good safeguarding knowledge, personalised care plans and strong support for people's choices, independence, health, relationships and community life.
People told inspectors they felt safe and happy. Staff knew people well and were described as kind and caring. The home was clean and well managed. Inspectors found one medicines-recording shortfall: extra medicines were given without staff always recording the reason or the outcome.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection in August 2017.
Kind, consistent staff
People were supported by a small team who knew them well. Inspectors found staff had good relationships with people and provided calm, caring support.
“People were supported by a small but consistent team of staff who were kind and caring.” from the report
Choice and independence
People helped plan their care and set personal goals. Staff supported them to develop skills, make choices and take part in activities in the community.
“People were supported to follow their interests, set goals and increase their independence.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's preferences, routines and goals. Staff understood that support needed to be different for each person.
“Care plans were person centred and included people's personal goals for the year.” from the report
Open management
People and staff could raise concerns. Inspectors found managers approachable and quality checks were being used to monitor the home.
“There was an open culture where staff and people could raise concerns or issues.” from the report
As-required medicines records
needs fixingSome people had extra medicines available when needed, but there were no written protocols explaining when and why they should be given. Staff did not always record the reason or the outcome. Managers said they would introduce protocols immediately.
“Records showed that staff had given people additional medicines, but they had not always recorded the reason why, or the outcome.” from the report
- 01What protocols are now in place for each person's as-required medicine?
- 02How do you check that the reason for giving an extra medicine and its outcome are recorded every time?
- 03How will you support my relative to set and review personal goals?
- 04How will you support my relative's preferred activities, community access and contact with family and friends?
- 05How do you make sure staff understand my relative's communication needs, health needs and choices?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the home, the care provided and all five CQC question areas; it was planned following the previous Good rating in August 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 March 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 Apple Orchard
5 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 January 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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Gloucestershire
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 £1,030 to £1,360 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.