CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Coates Garden House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, there were enough staff, medicines were managed safely and staff understood safeguarding procedures.
- Effective?
- Good
- The report does not give a separate rating for Effective.
- Caring?
- Good
- The report does not give a separate rating for Caring, although inspectors described care as kind and compassionate.
- Responsive?
- Good
- The report does not give a separate rating for Responsive, although inspectors found that staff supported people's interests, aspirations and choices.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home was described as well managed and led, with visible and approachable management. Inspectors recommended stronger provider involvement in reviewing quality action plans.
What inspectors found, February 2024
Coates Garden House is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with a recommendation to strengthen provider oversight of quality checks.
Inspectors visited the home without warning on 18 January 2024. Two inspectors carried out the visit, and an expert by experience spoke with families the following day. They spoke with people, a relative and staff, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and quality records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were also rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable risk assessments and care that respected people's choices, privacy and dignity.
The report also identified some areas to improve. There was limited evidence that the provider reviewed the manager's action plans, and some minor repairs were needed. The report recommends stronger service-level governance, but records the home as remaining Good since its previous rating in 2017.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, pursue their interests and take part in community activities. Staff used the least restrictive approach and supported people to achieve their goals.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests” from the report
Safe care
Inspectors found appropriate risk assessments, enough staff and safe medicines systems. Staff knew people well and understood how to protect them from abuse.
“People were kept safe from avoidable harm because staff knew them well and understood how to protect them from abuse.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
People received compassionate care, with their privacy and dignity respected. Staff supported people's individuality and involved them in decisions about their lives.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Positive staff culture
Inspectors found that management was visible and approachable. Staff felt respected, supported and valued, and staff turnover was low.
“Staff felt respected, supported, and valued by the registered manager which supported a positive and improvement driven culture.” from the report
Provider oversight of quality checks
needs fixingThe manager completed regular audits and action plans, but inspectors found limited evidence that the provider was involved in reviewing them. The provider was recommended to improve its monitoring systems.
“However, there was limited evidence of provider involvement and review of action plans.” from the report
Minor repairs
minorSome parts of the home needed minor repairs. The manager knew about this and had an action plan in place.
“Some areas of the home required some minor repair work, the registered manager was aware of this and had an action plan in place.” from the report
- 01What minor repairs were identified, and when will the action plan be completed?
- 02How does the provider now review the manager's audits and action plans?
- 03How are people's medicines reviewed to make sure they are not being overused to control behaviour?
- 04How will you support my relative to make choices, take positive risks and pursue their interests?
This inspection gave ratings for Safe and Well-led only; separate ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive are not given in the report. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 February 2024 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, July 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with some records still needing improvement.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 12 July 2017. One inspector spoke with four people living at the home, three care workers, the manager and three relatives. Records, care plans, recruitment files, training records and audits were also checked.
The home supported seven people with learning disabilities and mental health conditions, and had space for up to eight people. Inspectors found enough trained care workers, safe medicine systems, suitable risk assessments and safeguarding arrangements.
People were treated with dignity and encouraged to make choices and remain independent. Care plans were person-centred, activities reflected people's interests, and people had access to food, healthcare, family and the local community.
All five areas were rated Good. The report also found some record-keeping shortfalls, including missing medicine stock balances, unsigned electronic care plans and feedback actions that were not documented.
Safe recruitment
Checks were completed before care workers started. This addressed the concern found at the previous inspection.
“These checks had been completed before care workers commenced their role.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw care workers taking time with people, respecting privacy and supporting individual choices.
“We observed the service provided person centred care and it was clear the care workers had an understanding of people's needs.” from the report
Independence and choice
People were encouraged to do things for themselves, choose their routines and take part in activities that mattered to them.
“Care and support was provided based on the assessed risks which meant people could live their lives safely without undue restrictions.” from the report
Training and health support
Care workers received training and supervision. People were supported with healthcare, food, drink and maintaining their wellbeing.
“The provider supported care workers with training and supervision to ensure they had the up to date skills and knowledge to carry out their role and meet people's individual needs.” from the report
Strong management
The manager was seen as approachable and responsive. Staff understood their responsibilities and regular checks were used to monitor the service.
“Quality assurance systems including audits were in place. This helped to maintain and improve standards at the service.” from the report
Medicine stock records
needs fixingThe MARs did not record residual stock levels for prescribed medicines. Other balance records were available, but inspectors found one discrepancy in a prescribed medicine.
“However, we found residual stock levels for prescribed medicines were not recorded on the MAR.” from the report
Consent records
needs fixingThe electronic care records allowed people to sign their agreement and consent, but this had not yet been completed. The manager said it would be done during the next reviews.
“However, we found this had not been completed.” from the report
- 01Have all medicine stock balances been added to the MARs, and how are discrepancies now checked?
- 02Have all residents signed their agreement and consent in the electronic care records?
- 03How are actions from residents', relatives' and care workers' feedback recorded, given with timescales and checked as completed?
- 04How do you decide the number of care workers needed at different times, including after 9:00 pm?
- 05How are people's choices, independence and community activities reflected in their current care plans?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five rating areas, based on discussions, observations and records including three people's care plans and three care workers' files. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 July 2017 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 Coates Garden House
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2024Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
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
16 live-in carers within about an hour of East Riding of 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 £1,030 to £1,420 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
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.