CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Davies Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection prevention and control arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 1 December 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control because the home had been identified as a designated care setting for people discharged from hospital with a positive COVID-19 status.
The home provided long-term, respite and intermediate care for older people, including some people living with dementia. It could accommodate 60 people, and 43 people were living there on the inspection day.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, social distancing, admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, cleaning and possible outbreaks appropriately. They also found that the infection prevention and control policy was up to date.
The service was marked 'Inspected but not rated'. This means the inspection checked infection control arrangements but did not give an overall quality rating.
Clear information
Information was displayed in a way that people could understand. The home also had risk assessments for communication needs linked to learning disability or dementia.
“Easy to understand information was displayed around the home.” from the report
Testing arrangements
The home was using the government testing scheme to help identify and prevent an outbreak.
“The service was accessing the government testing scheme, and this was assisting them to identify and prevent an outbreak.” from the report
Cleaning and audits
The home had regular cleaning schedules and monthly checks. Inspectors said action was taken promptly when checks found shortfalls.
“Robust cleaning schedules were in place and monthly audits were carried.” from the report
Use of PPE
Inspectors were assured that personal protective equipment was being used effectively and safely.
“We were assured the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently testing people using the service and staff?
- 02How do you make sure PPE is used effectively and safely?
- 03What happens if cleaning audits find a shortfall?
- 04How would you manage an infection outbreak or safely admit someone who may have an infection?
- 05How have your infection prevention and control arrangements changed since the December 2020 inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only, so it did not rate the wider quality of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 December 2020 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, February 2019
Davies Court was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with two storage and cleanliness issues fixed during the visit.
This was a planned comprehensive inspection on 22 January 2019. The inspector and an expert by experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and other professionals. They observed care and checked care records, staff files and management information.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were protected from abuse, risks were managed, staffing was sufficient and medicines were generally handled safely. Staff were kind and respectful, and care plans reflected people's needs and preferences.
Inspectors found two issues during the visit. Temperatures in two medicine storage rooms had not been recorded every day, and one worn kitchenette unit was difficult to keep clean. The manager acted immediately on both issues. The previous inspection in September 2016 was also rated Good.
Safe care
Risks were identified and managed, and staff used equipment safely when helping people move.
“Risks associated with people's care were identified and plans were in place to help minimise risks.” from the report
Kind staff
Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, patience and respect.
“We spent time observing staff interacting with people and found they were supportive, kind and caring.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans were based on people's needs and preferences, with choices about daily life and activities.
“We looked at people's care records and found they were based on people's individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Good oversight
The management team used audits to identify concerns and said issues were dealt with promptly.
“Audits were in place for areas such as, medicine management, infection control, information security, care records and health and safety.” from the report
Medicine storage checks
needs fixingDaily temperatures had not been recorded in two medicine storage rooms. The manager took immediate action after inspectors raised this.
“Medicines were stored securely, however daily temperatures of two medicine store rooms were not taken.” from the report
Worn kitchenette unit
minorOne kitchenette unit was worn and could not be kept clean. The manager acted immediately to replace it.
“We identified a kitchen unit which had worn and was therefore difficult to keep clean.” from the report
- 01How do you now record and check temperatures in every medicine storage room?
- 02Has the worn kitchenette unit been replaced, and how do you check that all kitchen areas can be kept clean?
- 03How many staff will usually be available during the day and at night for the person's specific needs?
- 04What activities would be available for the person, and how would their personal interests and preferences be included?
- 05How would the family be told promptly if the person's health or care needs changed?
This was a planned comprehensive inspection covering all five ratings, and it looked at both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 February 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 Davies Court
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 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
97 live-in carers within about an hour of Rotherham
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. 80 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.”
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
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.