CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at California House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk assessments, appropriate safeguarding arrangements and safe medicine administration. They recommended recording which proof of identity had been checked for each new staff member.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained, supervised and appraised. People's needs were assessed and reviewed, and they received support with nutrition, healthcare and communication with families.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with dignity and respect, supported privacy and encouraged independence. People's choices and communication needs were recorded in their care plans.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were regularly reviewed and reflected people's needs, preferences and routines. Activities were based on people's interests, and the home helped people take part in community activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive, inclusive culture and regular quality checks. People, families and staff were asked for feedback, and staff said they felt supported by management.
What inspectors found, November 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised respite care, with a minor record-keeping recommendation for staff identity checks.
Inspectors visited on 29 and 30 October 2018. They spoke with one person, five family members, staff and a social care professional. They reviewed care records, staff files, policies and other information.
The home provides respite care for up to five people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine arrangements, suitable training and person-centred care. The home was clean and had recently been refurbished.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means inspectors found no evidence of serious risks or concerns, and the overall Good rating remained unchanged from the previous inspection.
Safe medicines
Inspectors found suitable arrangements for administering and storing medicines safely.
“We found appropriate arrangements continued to be in place for the safe administration and storage of medicines.” from the report
Respect and independence
Staff respected people's dignity and privacy and encouraged them to do things for themselves where possible.
“This demonstrated that staff supported people to be independent and people were encouraged to care for themselves where possible.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included people's routines, preferences, communication needs and the support they wanted.
“Care records were person centred, which means the person was at the centre of any care or support plans” from the report
Positive leadership
Inspectors found an inclusive culture, regular feedback and ongoing checks on the quality and safety of the home.
“The service had a positive culture that was person centred and inclusive.” from the report
Identity check records
minorStaff files did not record which proof of identity had been checked for each staff member. Inspectors made a recommendation for this to be recorded formally.
“Records did not show what proof of identity had been obtained from each member of staff.” from the report
- 01How do you now record which proof of identity has been checked for each new staff member?
- 02How will you match the staffing levels to my relative's needs during each respite stay?
- 03How will you support my relative's communication needs and keep our family updated?
- 04Which activities could my relative take part in, based on their interests and routines?
- 05How will you involve us in reviewing the care plan and giving feedback?
This was an announced inspection covering all five key questions, including the home, care records, staff files, policies and feedback from people, families and professionals. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 November 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 California House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 November 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Cumberland
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.
8 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
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.