CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Cedars Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines, risk assessments, infection control, staffing checks and incident reviews were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward to calculate the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open and honest culture, detailed care plans, regular feedback and meetings, and management systems that identified and acted on issues.
What inspectors found, September 2022
Rated Good overall; inspectors found people were safe and well supported, but staff time for meaningful activities was limited.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 25 August 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and visiting healthcare professionals. They reviewed medicines records, care records, risk assessments and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's care needs, safe medicines systems, suitable risk assessments and effective infection control. People were protected from abuse and staff knew how to report concerns.
People's care plans were detailed and person centred. The home had an open culture, encouraged feedback and worked with healthcare professionals. However, people, relatives and staff said staff often lacked time to provide activities and people could feel rushed.
The overall rating stayed Good, as it was at the previous inspection. This was a focused inspection, so the other three question ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection rather than reassessed.
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, given and recorded safely. People told inspectors they received them at the right time.
“Medicines were safely managed, and people were receiving their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Person-centred care
Care plans gave staff detailed information about people's needs and preferences.
“Care plans were person centred and detailed how people liked to be cared for.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff were encouraged to give feedback. The management team used audits and information from incidents to make improvements.
“The service had an open and honest culture which promoted good outcomes for people.” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingPeople, relatives and staff said there was not enough time for meaningful activities. Inspectors recommended that the provider review how staff are deployed.
“However, people, relatives and staff told us staff lacked time to provide meaningful activities.” from the report
- 01How are staff being deployed to make sure people have enough meaningful activities?
- 02What activities and opportunities to go out are currently available for residents?
- 03How do you check whether people are being left waiting or staff are feeling rushed?
- 04What progress has been made with the manager's application to become registered?
- 05How are residents' and relatives' suggestions about activities recorded and acted on?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the Effective, Caring and Responsive ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 September 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, May 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe medicines, infection controls and management, but staffing was not always enough.
This was a focused inspection prompted by concerns about whether people were being cared for safely. Inspectors visited on 7 May 2021 and carried out further checks by telephone and email until 18 May. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found that medicines, infection control, risk assessments and recruitment were managed safely. Relatives were positive about the care and praised the kindness of staff.
There were not always enough staff to meet people's needs. The management team said it had taken immediate steps, including using agency staff. Inspectors also found one missed safeguarding notification, some complaints were not handled fully under the home's policy, and some staff did not feel supported.
Infection control
Inspectors found robust arrangements for managing infection risks, including COVID-19. Visits were managed safely and personal protective equipment was used appropriately.
“The systems in place to manage the risks of infection, including those presented by the COVID-19 pandemic, were robust.” from the report
Person-centred care
Care assessments recorded people's preferences, communication needs, dietary requirements and cultural backgrounds. Relatives also described staff as kind and hardworking.
“Care assessments included information about people's preferences, likes and dislikes, communication needs, dietary requirements and cultural backgrounds.” from the report
Management oversight
Managers understood their responsibilities and the audits were thorough. The home also reviewed accidents and incidents to identify improvements.
“Audits were thorough and ensured managers had good oversight of how the service was performing.” from the report
Staffing levels
needs fixingThere were not always enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff said low numbers sometimes meant people could not receive care when they needed it, although the management team took immediate steps afterwards.
“Staff were not always deployed in sufficient numbers to meet people's needs.” from the report
Missed notification
needs fixingInspectors found one incident where the required notification and referral had not been made after suspected abuse.
“However, we identified one incident where the required notification and referral had not been made.” from the report
Complaints handling
needs fixingThe home did not always follow its own complaints policy, and one complaint was not fully addressed.
“We found that in addressing complaints the provider did not always follow their own policy, and had, on one occasion, not thoroughly addressed issues raised in complaints.” from the report
Staff support
minorAlthough the home offered several forms of support during the pandemic, staff told inspectors they did not feel supported by management. The management team planned a staff survey to identify what more was needed.
“However, the staff we spoke with told us they didn't feel supported by the management team.” from the report
- 01What are the current staffing levels on each shift, and how do they compare with the number and needs of people living here?
- 02What immediate changes were made after the inspection to address low staffing, and are agency staff still being used?
- 03What action was taken after the missed safeguarding notification and referral?
- 04How have you acted on staff feedback that they did not feel supported by management?
- 05How do you now make sure every complaint is investigated and answered in line with your complaints policy?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 May 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 Cedars Care Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2021GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2018GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 July 2017.
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
92 live-in carers within about an hour of Doncaster
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 £1,260 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“I can honestly say without Petros I don't believe he would have lived an extra 2 years”
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.