CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Danescourt
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, January 2018
Danescourt was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with some records and risk assessments needing improvement.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 26 October 2017. Inspectors spoke with both people living at the home, two relatives, five staff and managers. They also reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff records and quality checks.
The home had reopened in May 2017 after a long period of being dormant. It was registered for up to eight people with learning disabilities and had two people living there at the inspection. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines arrangements and good support with health, food and daily activities.
Inspectors found that staff were kind, respectful and understood people's individual needs. People were supported to make choices, stay in touch with family and take part in activities. The home had systems for complaints, audits and learning from incidents.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The report also identified some written records and individual risk assessments that needed to be improved.
Kind and respectful staff
Staff treated people with kindness and dignity. They knew people's backgrounds, preferences and support needs.
“The staff we observed treated people with kindness and dignity.” from the report
Calm support for complex needs
The home supported people with challenging behaviour and complex needs in a calm, person-centred way.
“The service provided care and support to people who had challenging behaviour and complex needs and did this in a responsive and person centred way.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in decisions about their care and were supported to do things for themselves and access the local community.
“People were supported to be as independent as possible and to go out into their local community, within any conditions of their placement.” from the report
Good health and medicines support
Inspectors found safe medicines systems and support with health appointments, monitoring and dietary needs.
“People were supported to maintain good health, have access to healthcare services and received on-going healthcare support.” from the report
Some records were incomplete
needs fixingSome assessments and plans were not signed or dated. One violence risk assessment did not show that its latest six-monthly review had been completed.
“There was room for improvement in relation to written records.” from the report
Restrictions needed more individual assessment
needs fixingThe home used restrictions including a locked kitchen and bedroom observation panels. Inspectors said these needed individual risk assessments to show that the least restrictive approach was being used and kept under review.
“Further, individualised risk assessments were needed, to make sure the least restrictive approach was taken in relation to each person and that this was kept under review.” from the report
- 01What action was taken to ensure every care plan and risk assessment was signed, dated and reviewed on time?
- 02How are locked areas, including the kitchen and knife drawer, assessed for each person and reviewed?
- 03When are the bedroom observation panels used, and how is each person's privacy and least restrictive care protected?
- 04How are people involved in reviewing their support plans, including plans they have not signed?
- 05What activities and community trips are currently available, and how are people's individual choices recorded?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five questions, based on two people living at the home, observations in communal areas, discussions and records; inspectors did not use SOFI. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 January 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 Danescourt
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- January 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014Inspected but not rated
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 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
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.