CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Caxton Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable infection prevention and control arrangements, including testing, PPE, cleaning, social distancing and updated policies. The provider also had measures to reduce the risks from COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection prevention and control arrangements.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 27 January 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, and on whether staffing pressures were affecting care.
Inspectors found appropriate visiting checks, regular testing, suitable personal protective equipment and updated infection control policies. Staff had training in PPE and hand hygiene. The home also used cleaning checks, risk assessments and social distancing.
The home was meeting the requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals to be vaccinated. Inspectors were assured about infection control arrangements, but the service was not given a quality rating from this inspection.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infections, including testing, PPE and social distancing.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Staff training
Staff completed online training on PPE, hand hygiene and other COVID-19 infection control measures.
“Staff completed online training including putting on and taking off PPE, hand hygiene and other IPC and COVID-19 related training and updates.” from the report
Contact during isolation
When visits could not take place because someone was isolating, people were supported to keep in touch by telephone.
“Where visiting couldn't take place due to isolation people were supported to make telephone calls for regular contact.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your infection prevention and control policies changed since this inspection?
- 02How do you currently manage staffing pressures, and what effect do they have on people's care?
- 03How do you support people to keep in contact with relatives when visits cannot take place?
- 04How do you check that staff and visiting professionals meet your current testing and vaccination requirements?
- 05How often are extra cleaning and infection control checks carried out now?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and staffing pressures only; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 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 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, with minor checks and medicines competency reviews needing attention.
Inspectors visited on 22 and 29 November 2019. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, health and social care professionals, staff and managers. They reviewed care, medicines, staff records and records about how the home was run.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were supported to make choices, develop independence, take part in activities and keep in touch with family and friends.
The inspection found safe recruitment, suitable staffing, safe medicines systems and good support from trained staff. Care was described as kind and respectful. The home had improved from its previous Requires Improvement rating, including improvements in safety and management.
A few minor issues were identified. The inspector asked the manager to document some routine safety checks and to complete medicines competency checks more regularly. The home was also larger than current best practice guidance suggests, although inspectors said the risks were reduced by the building and its setting.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, control their daily routines and gain new skills. Staff used the least restrictive approach and encouraged people to do things for themselves.
“The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that staff knew people well and treated them with dignity and respect. People appeared comfortable and had friendly relationships with staff.
“People responded positively to staff, showing us they shared friendly and caring relationships with them” from the report
Activities and relationships
People had regular opportunities to go out, pursue hobbies and take part in activities. Staff also helped people keep in contact with family and friends.
“People had regular opportunities to access their wider community, to take part in activities and to do the things they enjoyed.” from the report
Improved management
The home had made progress since the previous inspection. The earlier problem with required notifications had been corrected, and management used audits and feedback to support improvement.
“The provider and management had made positive progress to address concerns identified at the last inspection; for example, improvements have been made in relation to fire safety.” from the report
Routine safety records
minorThe inspector asked the manager to document regular checks of window opening restrictors and people's wheelchairs. The manager said this would be addressed.
“We spoke with the registered manager about documenting regular checks of window opening restrictors and people's wheelchairs and they responded to address this.” from the report
Medicines competency checks
needs fixingStaff had medicines training and competency checks, but the inspector said these should be completed more regularly in line with good practice guidance.
“Staff completed training and had their competency checked, although we spoke with the registered manager about completing these more regularly in line with good practice guidance.” from the report
Size of the home
minorThe home supported 10 people, which inspectors noted was larger than current best practice guidance. They said the building and its residential setting reduced the risk of a negative impact.
“The service is registered to support up to 10 people, and 10 people were using the service when we inspected. This is larger than current best practice guidance.” from the report
- 01How often are medicines competency checks now completed, and how are the results recorded?
- 02How often are window opening restrictors and people's wheelchairs checked and documented?
- 03How does the home make sure its size does not limit people's choice, independence or access to the community?
- 04How are people's individual activity plans reviewed and changed when their interests or needs change?
- 05How are people and relatives involved in reviewing care plans and making decisions about support?
This was a planned inspection of the care home, covering the premises and care provided, with all five CQC questions rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 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.
Every inspection of Caxton Lodge
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of North Yorkshire
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 £1,010 to £1,290 a week. 27 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.