CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Appleton House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough suitable staff and appropriate recruitment checks. They also found safe systems for medicines, infection control and managing risks such as community access and deteriorating mental health.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans and assessments were thorough and based on professional guidance. Staff received training and supervision, and people were supported to access physical and mental health services.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff had developed positive relationships with people. Inspectors found that people's choices, privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care and support reflected people's needs, preferences and wishes. People were supported with family contact, activities and recovery goals, and complaints were dealt with professionally.
- Well-led?
- Good
- There was a registered manager and a clear management structure. Regular audits, reviews and development plans were used to monitor and improve the service.
What inspectors found, September 2018
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care across all five areas.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 12 and 13 July 2018. It was the first inspection since the home re-registered with a new provider. One inspector spoke with people, staff and managers, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines records, complaints, training and other records.
Six people were living at the home during the inspection, with one person in hospital. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines arrangements and systems to protect people from harm. Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed, and staff had appropriate training and supervision.
People had positive relationships with staff. Their privacy, dignity, independence and choices were respected. People were supported with healthcare, family contact, activities and recovery goals, and complaints had been handled professionally.
The overall rating was Good. Each of the five areas was also rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to support people safely. Recruitment checks were also in place to help ensure staff were suitable for care work.
“The provider made sure there were sufficient numbers of suitable staff deployed to keep people safe.” from the report
Individual care
Care plans covered people's health, mental health, preferences and goals. They were reviewed regularly and supported positive progress for some people.
“Care plans were detailed, consistent and took the whole person into account.” from the report
Kind relationships
Staff knew people's backgrounds and interests and built supportive relationships with them. People were involved in decisions about their care.
“We saw positive, friendly relationships with joking and light-hearted conversations.” from the report
Independence and activities
The home supported people to develop skills, use community services, keep family links and work towards more independent living.
“People could participate in a variety of activities which improved their wellbeing and supported their recovery.” from the report
Quality checks
The manager and provider used regular audits, spot checks, reviews and action plans to monitor the service.
“There was an effective governance framework designed to maintain and improve the quality of the service people received.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently support each person to manage their mental health and recognise when it may be getting worse?
- 02How are people supported to manage their own medicines, and what checks are used while they become more self-reliant?
- 03What activities, education or work opportunities are currently available to support people's recovery and independence?
- 04How do you involve families in care reviews, and how do you respect a person's wishes about family contact?
- 05Was the planned refurbishment of the shared kitchen completed, and what other improvements have been made since this inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection of the home, including both its premises and care, and it rated all five areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 September 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 Appleton House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- September 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 October 2016.
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
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Southampton
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 £1,350 a week. 39 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.