CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Castle Hill House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, PPE, testing, social distancing, admissions and visiting arrangements. The provider also said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection, although inspectors noted regular communication from the registered manager about safety procedures.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Castle Hill House Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and visiting arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The home provides nursing care for up to 43 mainly older people. There were 32 people living there when inspectors visited, including some people living with dementia.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 January 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care. They also spoke with two relatives after the visit.
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, arranged testing, followed social distancing, managed visiting, and kept its infection control policy up to date. Staffing levels were reviewed regularly. The registered manager also kept people, staff and families informed.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating. It was a focused check rather than a full inspection of all five areas of care.
Clear communication
The registered manager regularly updated people, staff and families about safety procedures and precautions.
“The registered manager was communicating with people, staff and family members regularly to make sure everyone had an understanding of procedures and precautions being taken, and how to keep people safe.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors found that the home had updated policies, increased cleaning, available PPE and regular COVID-19 testing.
“Additional measures had been put in place to increase cleaning schedules and regular cleaning of touch points around the service.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
The home provided different access points and allowed essential care-giver visits and visits for people receiving end of life care.
“Essential care givers and visits to people in receipt of end of life care were possible.” from the report
Staffing review
Staffing levels were regularly reviewed to support safe care during COVID-19-related pressures.
“Staffing levels were continuously reviewed in order to ensure there were safe levels of staff in all roles to support people safely.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you managing any current staffing pressures linked to COVID-19 or other absences?
- 02How often are residents and staff tested for COVID-19 now, and what happens after a positive result?
- 03How are visits arranged now, including visits from essential care givers and for people receiving end of life care?
- 04How do you check that PPE, cleaning and infection control procedures are being followed?
- 05Are all staff and visiting professionals who need to be vaccinated against COVID-19 vaccinated or formally exempt?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 February 2022 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
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 13 November 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional. They observed care, checked the building and reviewed care, medicine, staffing and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, safe medicine arrangements, personalised care plans and kind interactions. People were supported with food, activities, healthcare appointments and contact with family and friends.
The previous inspection in October 2017 was rated Requires Improvement. Problems then included staffing levels, medicines records, mental capacity assessments and care records. Inspectors found these areas had improved and that the home was meeting the outstanding legal requirements.
Staffing and call bells
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Changes to staff deployment and break times helped make care more timely.
“At this inspection we found there were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs appropriately.” from the report
Medicine safety
Medicine records had no gaps in the sample checked. Staff were trained, medicine stocks matched the records and storage checks were completed.
“People were supported to take their medicines at the right time by staff who had been appropriately trained.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff protecting privacy, asking for consent and supporting people's choices.
“Staff were warm and friendly, frequently asking if people were comfortable and had all they needed.” from the report
Activities and family contact
The home offered regular activities and visits from entertainers. Staff supported people to keep in touch with relatives and friends.
“People were able to take part in a range of group and individual activities.” from the report
Improved oversight
Audits covering medicines, care plans, falls, infection control and safety had been reviewed. Inspectors found these systems helped identify and address improvements.
“These revised audits were effective in helping to ensure that any areas for improvement were identified and addressed.” from the report
No registered manager in post
needs fixingThe home did not have a registered manager when inspectors visited. A new manager had been appointed and their application to become registered was nearing completion.
“The service is required to have a registered manager and at the time of the inspection a registered manager was not in post.” from the report
- 01Has the manager's application to become the registered manager been completed, and who is currently responsible for the home?
- 02How are staffing levels adjusted during busy periods, especially in the morning?
- 03How are medicine records, stocks and storage temperatures checked now?
- 04How are changes in a person's needs recorded and passed to staff at handovers?
- 05What activities would be available for someone who could not join group events?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering the overall quality of the care home, including the premises and care provided, and all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 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 Castle Hill House Care Home
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 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
10 live-in carers within about two hours of Cornwall
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 £1,200 a week. 8 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“He had been a little anxious before she arrived, but has since stated that he would be very happy for her to care for him again”
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.