CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Digby Manor Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were described as safe, with enough staff and safe medicine arrangements. Risk assessments were in place, but inspectors said some risk assessments and emergency evacuation plans needed more regular review.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received care based on assessments, had access to health professionals and were supported with food and drink. Some food and fluid records did not contain enough detail, although the home provided evidence after the inspection that this had been addressed.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives said staff were kind and caring, and inspectors observed attentive and respectful interactions. Privacy and dignity were not always protected in shared bedrooms.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and people had access to varied activities and entertainment. Inspectors said care plans and daily records needed more regular evaluation to show people's wellbeing.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a positive culture, regular audits and ways for people, relatives and staff to give feedback. Inspectors found the management team understood its responsibilities and worked effectively.
What inspectors found, March 2019
Digby Manor Residential Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, but shared bedrooms did not always protect privacy and dignity.
This was the first inspection since the home was registered in 2017. It was an unannounced, planned comprehensive inspection on 6 March 2019. The inspector spoke with people, relatives, visitors, staff and visiting professionals, and checked care, medicine and staff records.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine arrangements, suitable training, good links with health professionals and a lively programme of activities.
There were some areas to improve. Three shared bedrooms did not provide enough privacy or personal space, and the inspector recommended reviewing their use. Some care and risk records needed more regular reviews. The home said several recording issues would be addressed after the inspection.
Kind and attentive staff
People and relatives were very positive about the care. Inspectors observed staff responding promptly and kindly to people's requests.
“We observed all staff interaction with people was attentive, kindly, encouraging and appropriate.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
People, relatives and staff said there were enough staff. Medicines records were clear, and staff were trained and checked as competent before giving medicines.
“Medicines records were clear and accurate.” from the report
Good activities and atmosphere
The home offered varied activities and entertainment, with people joining in or watching as they wished. Inspectors saw a lively and stimulating atmosphere.
“A lively, energetic and stimulating atmosphere was observed.” from the report
Good management and feedback
The management team used audits, meetings, surveys and other feedback to monitor the service and involve people and relatives.
“Regular audits were completed to monitor service provision and to ensure the safety of people who used the service.” from the report
Shared bedrooms
needs fixingSome people shared bedrooms, and the rooms did not provide enough privacy or a place to spend time alone. The inspector recommended that the provider reconsider their use.
“People did not have their privacy or a place where they could spend time on their own if they wanted their own space.” from the report
Risk and evacuation reviews
needs fixingInspectors said risk assessments and personal emergency evacuation plans needed more regular review. The home said this would be addressed, and provided evidence after the inspection that the evacuation plans had been updated.
“People's Personal Evacuation Plans, (PEEPS) contained information about people's mobility, if people needed to be evacuated from the building in an emergency. They needed more regular review.” from the report
Food and fluid records
needs fixingFluid charts did not include daily totals, and food charts did not say what people had eaten. The home provided information after the inspection showing this had been addressed.
“However fluid charts did not include daily totals and food charts did not include details of what people had eaten.” from the report
Dining room presentation
minorTables were not well set for a positive dining experience, and soothing music was not available to encourage people who might be reluctant to eat.
“Tables however, were not well-set to make it a positive visual dining experience for people as they ate their meal.” from the report
- 01How many shared bedrooms are currently in use, and how will my relative's privacy and personal space be protected?
- 02How often are risk assessments and personal emergency evacuation plans reviewed now?
- 03How are food and fluid records checked to make sure they include daily totals and details of what people have eaten?
- 04How often are care plans and daily records evaluated to show changes in a person's wellbeing?
- 05What changes have been made to the dining room since the inspection?
This was an unannounced, planned comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions; it was the first inspection since the home was registered in 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 March 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 Digby Manor Residential Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- March 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Digby Manor Residential Care Home →
- March 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 March 2017.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.