CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Caterpillar House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff understood safeguarding and risk management, staffing levels were sufficient, and medicines were managed safely overall, although two medicine records needed correcting during the visit.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and supported people to access healthcare and maintain a balanced diet. Records for one person's specialised diet were not always clear at first, but the manager updated them immediately.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed speaking with people calmly, kindly and respectfully. People were supported to express their views, make choices and develop their independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised to people's preferences, communication needs and interests. People were supported to take part in activities and visits, and a complaints procedure was available.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team was described as approachable and supportive. Feedback, staff checks, audits and advice from health professionals were used to improve care.
What inspectors found, December 2021
Caterpillar House was rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with two record-keeping issues corrected during the visit.
This was the first inspection since the home registered in October 2019. One inspector visited on 16 November 2021. They spoke with people, relatives, health professionals and staff, and checked care records, risk assessments, recruitment files, training and quality checks.
The home supports up to three people with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. Three people lived there at the time. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated kindly and supported to make choices, build independence and take part in activities they enjoyed.
Inspectors found staff understood people's needs and risks. Medicines were mostly managed safely, staff received relevant training, and people could access food, drinks and healthcare. The home also used audits and feedback to monitor the quality of care.
There were two record-keeping shortfalls. Two medicines did not initially have enough instructions, and records for one person's specialised diet were not always clear. The manager corrected both issues during the inspection. All five areas were rated Good, and this was the home's first inspection.
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, preferences, wishes and goals. Staff supported people to make choices and live as independently as possible.
“Each person's care plan was individualised and focused on their strengths, abilities and goals, which had been discussed with relatives and health professionals.” from the report
Kind staff
Inspectors saw calm, friendly and kind interactions. Relatives said people were happy and responded well to staff.
“We observed staff interacting and speaking with people in a calm, friendly and kind way.” from the report
Building independence
Staff helped people gain confidence and new skills. One person had learned to make their own drinks.
“People's independence was promoted. Staff told us how they worked with people to build their confidence and independence.” from the report
Activities and community access
People took part in activities and outings suited to their interests. Staff worked with a family to support a person to return safely to rock climbing.
“People were involved in all aspects of the home including choice of meals, visiting places of interest and activities.” from the report
Staff knowledge and training
Staff had training relevant to their roles and to the needs of the people they supported. Inspectors found staff knew people well and responded calmly to difficult situations.
“Staff told us, and records confirmed, staff received training that was relevant to their roles and to the specific needs of the people they supported.” from the report
Medicine instructions
needs fixingTwo medicine records initially said medicines should be used as directed but gave no further instructions. The manager amended the records before the inspection ended and updated the care plans.
“We saw two medicines recorded on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) to use 'as directed' with no further instructions.” from the report
Specialised diet records
needs fixingRecords for one person who needed a specialised diet did not always clearly show that the correct food and drinks had been provided. The manager updated the records and spoke with staff immediately.
“The records for one person who required a specialised diet were not always recorded clearly.” from the report
- 01How do you check that all medicines have clear instructions, including medicines used as needed?
- 02How are specialised diets and fluid requirements recorded and checked each day?
- 03How will you involve our relative and family in reviewing their care plan and risk assessments?
- 04What activities and community outings would be suitable for our relative's interests and communication needs?
- 05How do staff support people to gain new skills and become more independent?
This was the first inspection and covered all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control measures; there were no earlier ratings to carry over. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 December 2021 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 Caterpillar House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- December 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 October 2019.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Sandwell
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 £950 to £1,190 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
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.