CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Deja Vu
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, clear risk assessments and safe medicines systems. Staff understood safeguarding, incident reporting and the risks linked to seizures and behaviours that could challenge.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, and people received help with health care, food and drink. One decision about using a sound monitor for seizures had not initially been recorded, but this was completed during the inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were described as kind and caring. Inspectors saw people treated with respect, privacy and dignity, and supported to communicate, make choices and develop independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's histories, preferences, goals and communication needs. People were supported to take part in activities, visit the community and have regular care reviews.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Leadership was visible and staff and relatives spoke positively about management. Audits covered care, medicines, staff files, infection control and health and safety, with actions taken to improve the service.
What inspectors found, January 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with one recording issue corrected during the inspection.
The inspection was unannounced on 11 December 2018 and continued on 12 December 2018 with notice. The inspector reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files, training, complaints, safety records and quality checks. They also spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, and observed care.
The home supported six people with learning disabilities and autistic spectrum disorder. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines arrangements, clear risk plans and good support when people experienced seizures or behaviours that could challenge. People had access to health care, activities, community visits and support to make choices.
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw people's privacy, dignity, communication needs and independence being respected. They also found approachable leadership, good teamwork and effective checks to improve the service.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home was also rated Good at its previous inspection, and this inspection found that the rating should remain Good.
Safe care and staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, with recruitment checks showing staff were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. Risk assessments and safeguarding systems were in place.
“There were enough staff to provide safe care and recruitment checks had ensured they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and families described staff as kind, caring and friendly. Inspectors saw staff respect people's privacy, dignity and personal space.
“People and their families described the staff as caring, kind and friendly and the atmosphere of the home as relaxed and engaging.” from the report
Choice and independence
Staff supported people to make day-to-day choices and take part in their own care. People were supported to communicate in ways that worked for them and to do activities in the community.
“Promoting independence, involving people and using creative approaches were embedded and normal practice for staff.” from the report
Good leadership and checks
The home had visible leadership and good teamwork. Regular audits covered important areas and were used to identify and make improvements.
“Quality monitoring systems and processes were in place and up to date.” from the report
Community involvement
People were supported to take part in activities linked to their interests, such as shopping, meals out, walks, swimming and cookery sessions.
“People were supported to access the community and participate in activities which matched their hobbies and interests and were reflected in individual support plans.” from the report
One decision was not recorded at first
minorThe home had started using a sound monitor to alert staff to one person's seizures, but the decision had not initially been recorded. The required paperwork was completed by the second day of the inspection.
“However, we found that the service had recently started to use a sound monitor for one person to alert staff to seizures. This decision had not been recorded.” from the report
- 01How do you currently record decisions about monitoring equipment, including equipment used to alert staff to seizures?
- 02What is the current position on any Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications or assessments for my relative?
- 03How do you review staffing levels when a person's needs or behaviour changes, especially during community activities?
- 04How will my relative's preferred communication method be recorded and used by all staff?
- 05Can you show me how families can raise a complaint and whether the accessible easy-read complaints information is now available?
This was a comprehensive inspection of the home and all five CQC questions; the report says the overall Good rating remained unchanged from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 January 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 Deja Vu
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 June 2014.
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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.