CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Dean House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected by safeguarding systems, risk assessments and safety checks. Medicines records were complete, but inspectors said checking medicine stock could be more robust.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, and people's health, food, activity and decision-making needs were addressed. Inspectors found the home was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They were involved in their care and supported to make choices about their lives.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was tailored to each person, with accessible information and support for activities, relationships and community life. People and relatives knew how to raise complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager had oversight of the home and completed regular checks. People and staff were involved in decisions, and the home used feedback and audits to improve care.
What inspectors found, February 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with a small medicines-checking issue and some redecorating needed.
The unannounced inspection took place on 22 January 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, staff, relatives and health and social care professionals. They looked at care records, medicines, staffing, training, complaints, the building and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe and happy. Staff were described as kind, respectful and supportive, and people had choice and control over their daily lives.
Inspectors found strong safeguarding, suitable staffing and detailed personalised care. They also found that medicines stock checks could be more thorough, and that some parts of the home needed redecorating.
Kind and respectful care
People were treated as individuals and staff supported their dignity, relationships and independence. Inspectors saw a warm and positive atmosphere.
“People told us they were safe and happy in the home. Staff were kind and caring and went over and above what was expected of them.” from the report
Consistent staffing
Staffing was adjusted to people's needs and planned activities. Staff were long-serving and agency staff were not used, supporting continuity of care.
“Staff members were all long-serving and agency staff were not used. This meant good continuity of care for people.” from the report
Choice and control
People chose their meals, clothing and daily activities. They also helped shape their care plans and the running of the home.
“People chose what they ate, what they wore and how they spent their day.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, histories and goals. People could use accessible information and take part in activities in the home and community.
“People's care was tailored in the way they wanted it.” from the report
Medicine stock checks
needs fixingInspectors found that medicine stock totals were not always carried forward to show that stock matched what had been given. The manager said this would be actioned the next day.
“We fed back to the registered manager the checking of medicines stock could be more robust.” from the report
Some redecoration needed
minorInspectors noted that parts of the home needed redecorating. The manager was aware and had plans to do this.
“Parts of the home needed redecorating. The registered manager was aware of this and told us of their plans to redecorate.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to medicine stock checks after the inspection?
- 02Have the parts of the home identified as needing redecoration now been redecorated?
- 03How do you adjust staffing when people have appointments, outings or changing needs?
- 04How are people involved in creating and reviewing their care plans?
- 05How do people and relatives give feedback or raise a complaint?
This was an unannounced inspection of the care provided and the premises, covering all five CQC questions and providing the first rating under the current provider. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 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 Dean House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- February 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 February 2018.
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
21 live-in carers within about an hour of Torbay
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 £1,400 a week. 17 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
“She was not phased by anything, she was adaptable, kind & gave us complete confidence to go away & not worry about a thing!”
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.