CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 32 York Street
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely and there were enough suitable staff. Safeguarding systems and emergency plans were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and supervision, and relatives were involved in care planning. People were supported with food, healthcare, consent and daily living.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw friendly interactions and found that people were treated with dignity and respect. People were supported to make choices and to be as independent as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences, communication needs, interests and routines. Complaints were recorded, investigated and used for learning.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and provider used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor the service. One issue with reviewing support documentation was identified and acted on during the inspection.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Autism Together - 32 York Street was rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care with minor issues around redecoration and reviewing support records.
The inspection visit took place on 30 October 2019. One inspector observed care, spoke with two relatives, three staff members and a professional, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home supported two people with autism. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and involved in decisions about their care. Staff supported choice, independence, communication, healthy living and contact with family.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Some areas needed redecoration, and inspectors found one issue with reviewing support records. The manager acted on this during the inspection. The previous overall rating was also Good.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed positive relationships between people and staff. Relatives also said people were treated well.
“People were treated with respect, dignity and kindness.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans gave staff detailed guidance about people's needs. People were helped to make choices and develop independence.
“Person centered support plans were detailed and guided staff about people's needs and how to meet them.” from the report
Enough suitable staff
People were supported one to one. Recruitment checks, training and supervision were in place.
“There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs and to enable them to engage with activities, access the community and to live their lives as independently as possible.” from the report
Some redecoration was needed
minorInspectors found that parts of the house needed redecoration. The manager showed inspectors plans for this work.
“Some areas of the house were in need of redecoration, however, the registered manager was able to show us the plans they had in place for this.” from the report
Support record reviews
needs fixingInspectors identified an issue with one part of the review process for support records. The manager acted on it immediately.
“Through inspection it was identified that there was an issue with one aspect of the reviewing of support documentation.” from the report
- 01What redecoration work was planned, and has it now been completed?
- 02What was the issue with reviewing support documentation, and what changes were made?
- 03How would you involve my relative and our family in care planning and regular reviews?
- 04How would you support my relative's communication needs, choices and independence?
- 05How do you make sure staff know and follow each person's support plan?
This was a planned inspection of the care, premises and management of the home, covering all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 December 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, April 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, respectful and person-centred care, with the home remaining Good since its last inspection.
Inspectors visited on 15 March 2017 and reviewed the whole home. They spoke with staff, the two people living there and relatives. They observed care, checked medicines, records, staffing, training and the building.
They found people were safe and supported by staff who knew them well. Medicines were stored and managed safely. Care plans were personal, regularly updated and based on people's choices. Staff supported people with health care, daily life, work and activities.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as at the previous inspection.
Consistent staff
The home had a stable staff team. Inspectors found that staff understood the people they supported and that staffing levels were maintained.
“We saw that the service was staffed by a consistent staff team who had all worked for the provider organisation for a long time.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored safely, checked weekly and given in a way that respected people's preferences.
“We found medication procedures at the home were safe.” from the report
Personal care
Care plans explained how each person wanted and needed to be supported. People helped create their own plans.
“Care plans were person centred and driven by the people who lived who lived in the home.” from the report
Respectful relationships
Staff knew people's likes, dislikes and support needs. Inspectors saw respectful, person-centred interactions.
“We observed the staff interacting with the people who lived in the home and it was obvious that the staff knew them well and how it was best to support them.” from the report
Quality checks
The home carried out regular checks on areas including health and safety, care records, staff records and medicines.
“We saw that these checks were carried out regularly and thoroughly and that any action that had been identified was followed through and completed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are each person's care plans reviewed and updated now, and how are people involved in writing them?
- 02How are medicines audited, and how are people's preferences about taking medicines recorded?
- 03What training and supervision do staff currently receive for the specific needs of the people living in the home?
- 04What work, volunteering, leisure and community activities are currently available to each person?
- 05How can people and relatives raise concerns, and how are complaints recorded and followed up?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the whole home, with ratings remaining Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 April 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 32 York Street
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Wirral
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 £1,230 a week. 37 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.