CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Capricorn Cottage
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care and good management, but the inspection was prompted by a money theft incident whose circumstances it did not examine.
Inspectors visited on 19, 20 and 21 August 2020. They spoke with three relatives and four staff members. They reviewed six people's care records, medicine records and records about how the home was managed.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine management, infection control measures and plans to manage risks. People were supported to make choices, gain skills and become more independent.
The inspection was prompted partly by an incident in which money was stolen from the accounts of eight people. The report says this was subject to a criminal investigation and that the inspection did not examine what happened. The provider had taken action to remove responsibility for managing people's bank accounts.
The report says the home is larger than recommended by best practice guidance. However, inspectors rated it Good because the home was managed to support people's independence, choice, control and involvement in the community. The previous overall rating was also Good, published on 14 December 2018.
Promoting independence
Support was focused on helping people gain skills, make choices and become more independent.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Safe medicines
Inspectors found that medicines were stored, given and recorded safely, with regular checks by management.
“Medicines were well-managed, and people received their medicines on time and in line with their prescriptions.” from the report
Staffing and risk planning
The home had enough staff to meet people's needs and used risk assessments and care plans to help keep people safe.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Family involvement
Relatives said they were kept informed and involved in planning care. The home also gathered views through annual surveys.
“Relatives told us they were kept up to date about people's needs and were included in planning the care needed.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The manager reviewed incidents and changed care plans when support was not working well. Inspectors found this had improved one person's experience and reduced their need for medicines to manage emotions.
“This enabled the manager to review the person's care needs and liaise with healthcare professionals.” from the report
Theft of people's money
seriousThe inspection was partly prompted by money being stolen from the accounts of eight people. The circumstances were not examined in this inspection, although the provider had removed responsibility for managing people's bank accounts.
“This incident is subject to a criminal investigation.” from the report
Training and competency records
needs fixingThere were some gaps in staff training and support. Competency spot checks had taken place, but they were not always recorded.
“However, these had not always been documented.” from the report
Staff working across services
needs fixingSome staff finished shifts at the home and then worked at another service run by the provider. The manager said this was not ideal for infection control and had set an end date while recruiting.
“Some staff were leaving their shift at Capricorn Cottage and going on to work at another of the provider's care organisations.” from the report
Size of the home
minorThe home accommodates up to 34 people, although 29 people were living there during the inspection. Inspectors noted that it is larger than recommended by best practice guidance.
“The service is larger than recommended by best practice guidance.” from the report
No registered manager in post
minorThere was no registered manager at the time of the inspection. The current manager had applied to register with the CQC.
“There was no registered manager in post. However, the provider had met their regulatory responsibility” from the report
- 01What safeguards are now in place to protect people's money following the theft from eight people's accounts?
- 02Has the planned end date for staff working across the home and another provider service been reached?
- 03Which staff training and support gaps remained, and how are competency spot checks now recorded?
- 04What is the current progress of the manager's application to register with the CQC?
- 05How does the home's size affect people's independence, choice and movement to different care settings?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, prompted partly by a money theft incident; the circumstances of that incident and the other three key questions were not examined or rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 November 2020 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, December 2018
Capricorn Cottage is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some fire-safety records and checks needing attention.
Inspectors visited the home without warning on 23 and 24 August 2018. They spoke with people living there, staff and managers, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines, training, recruitment and other records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People appeared happy and relaxed, staff knew their needs, medicines were managed safely, and people were supported to make choices and become more independent.
The inspection found some issues that needed attention. A fire exit was partly blocked, some fire-check records did not give enough detail, two staff started before their DBS checks arrived, and six staff had not completed infection-control training. The home had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
Safer care
Risks to people's safety were assessed and reviewed. Staff understood safeguarding and incident investigations were used to reduce the chance of problems happening again.
“Risks to people's safety had been assessed, monitored and managed so they were supported to stay safe while their freedom was respected.” from the report
Promoting independence
The home was moving away from institutional ways of working. People were supported to make choices, take part in daily tasks and use equipment that helped them do more for themselves.
“The registered manager had developed a culture of increasing people's independence and abilities.” from the report
Improved nutrition
Menus had been reviewed after earlier concerns about weight management. People at risk of being underweight received extra support, and inspectors saw positive changes in people's weight.
“This review of the menu had a positive effect on people.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were supported to follow hobbies, go out into the community and take part in activities that built confidence and independence.
“People were supported to access the community and to undertake activities to improve their independence.” from the report
Partly blocked fire exit
seriousA fire exit was partly blocked by furniture. The manager agreed to review where the furniture was placed.
“However, we noted that one double door, marked as a fire exit and included in the emergency floor plan, was partially obstructed by a dining table and chairs.” from the report
Fire-check records
needs fixingSome weekly fire-check records did not identify which call point had been tested. Inspectors said the records needed to be clearer.
“We noted that records of weekly checks could be improved by better recording of the specific location of call points tested.” from the report
Checks before employment
needs fixingTwo staff started work before their DBS checks had arrived. The home said another check had been completed and that the staff were supervised until the DBS checks were received.
“We found that two people had started their employment, before their DBS had been received by the home.” from the report
Outstanding infection training
needs fixingSix staff had not completed infection-prevention and control training at the time of inspection. Four of these staff had only started the month before.
“We noted that six staff had not completed the training, but four of them had only been employed during July 2018, the month before our inspection visit.” from the report
- 01Has the fire exit remained clear, and how are fire exits and call points checked and recorded now?
- 02Were the two staff members' DBS checks received, and what checks are completed before new staff start work?
- 03Have all staff completed infection-prevention and control training, including the six staff who had not completed it at the inspection?
- 04How are people's weight, nutrition and food choices monitored now, following the earlier concerns about weight management?
- 05How will the home support my relative's own choices, independence, community activities and preferred way of communicating?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, including all five CQC questions, and each area received a Good rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 December 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 Capricorn Cottage
6 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- November 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2016Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: InadequateResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- February 2016Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2015InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 May 2012.
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 Lincolnshire
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. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.