CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Dell House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe, and inspectors found suitable risk assessments, enough staff and safe medicines arrangements. One medicines record discrepancy was identified and investigated.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received support suited to their needs, including help with food, drinks and healthcare. Staff had relevant training and worked well with the local GP surgery.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed to be kind, warm and respectful. People were involved in decisions about their care and were supported to remain independent where possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences and communication needs. The home provided activities, including one-to-one support for people who stayed in their rooms or were cared for in bed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive culture and robust quality checks. Managers followed up identified shortfalls and gave people and staff opportunities to provide feedback.
What inspectors found, December 2021
Dell House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with one medicines record discrepancy that was investigated.
This was the first inspection of the home. It was unannounced and took place on 2 December 2021. Inspectors spoke with four people, two relatives and five staff. They also observed care and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
Inspectors found that people felt safe and received prompt support. Medicines were managed safely, the home was clean, and infection control arrangements were suitable. Staff supported people to make choices, eat and drink well, and access healthcare.
The home was caring and person-centred. Staff knew people's preferences, protected their dignity and supported activities and relationships. Inspectors also found good management, regular checks on quality and action when problems were identified. All five areas were rated Good.
Prompt support
Inspectors found enough staff to answer call bells promptly and support people with eating, drinking and activities.
“Observations concluded that there were enough staff to support people and answer call bells in a timely manner.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People said staff treated them well. Inspectors saw care being delivered privately and in a way that protected dignity.
“We observed staff that staff supported people in a way that respected their dignity, ensuring care was delivered in a private setting” from the report
Personalised care
Care records included people's likes, dislikes, life histories and communication needs. Staff used this information in their daily support.
“People's care records reflected their individuality and their likes, dislikes and preferences.” from the report
Activities and social contact
The home had activities staff every day and planned activities for people who preferred to stay in their rooms or were cared for in bed.
“There was a member of activities staff working seven days a week.” from the report
Strong quality checks
Senior staff, the manager and the provider's quality team carried out audits. Inspectors saw that identified shortfalls were followed up.
“We saw evidence that shortfalls were identified, and that action was taken to address these.” from the report
One medicines record discrepancy
minorOn one occasion, the number of tablets given did not match the number recorded. The home investigated this and the report says medicines were otherwise managed safely.
“We reviewed medicines administration records (MARs) and found that on all but one occasion, the number of tablets administered matched those signed for on the record.” from the report
- 01What caused the medicines record discrepancy, and what checks are now in place to prevent this happening again?
- 02How many staff are usually available on each shift, and how will staffing be maintained while the home continues to recruit?
- 03How are activities planned for people who prefer to stay in their rooms or are cared for in bed?
- 04How will you involve my relative, family members or an advocate in care planning and decisions?
- 05How often will healthcare staff visit to review changes in my relative's needs or medicines?
This was the home's first unannounced inspection and covered the premises and care across all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 December 2021 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 Dell House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- December 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 March 2019.
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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Suffolk
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. 17 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
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.