CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Dimensions Baily Thomas House Haysoms Drive
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment checks, clear risk assessments and safe medicines practice. Some agency staff had been used while recruitment continued, and repairs to fencing were still awaited.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and staff had training, supervision and access to specialist advice. The home was applying for a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisation for each person using the service.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, compassionate and respectful. People’s communication methods and choices were understood, and relatives gave positive feedback.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was flexible and aimed to maintain people's normal routines, activities and relationships. Care plans were being rewritten and updated, and a new computerised care planning system was being introduced.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The new manager understood the home's development needs and quality checks were in place. Staff described management as accessible, and improvement plans covered areas such as fencing and internal repairs.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and flexible care, while staffing and care plan changes were still settling.
This was a planned inspection on 30 October 2019. One inspector spoke with the manager and four staff, observed four people, checked three care records and two staff files, and reviewed medicines, incidents, complaints and audits. Two relatives were also contacted by telephone.
The home supported up to six people with learning disabilities or autism, mainly for respite stays. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness and supported to continue their usual routines, activities and links with the community. Medicines, risks, staff training and recruitment were managed safely.
A new manager had been registered since the previous inspection. The home was rebuilding its staff team, updating care plans and applying for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards for each person. All five CQC questions were rated Good, unchanged from the previous inspection.
Kind support
Inspectors saw staff supporting people gently and positively. Staff understood people's needs and used appropriate communication and reassurance.
“Staff understood people's needs and were kind and compassionate in the way they supported them.” from the report
Flexible respite
The home adapted support around people's routines, choices and activities. People could continue attending day services, hobbies and clubs during stays.
“People received care and support in a way that was flexible and responsive to their needs.” from the report
Safe care
Risks were assessed and guidance was available for complex needs such as epilepsy, swallowing, moving and positioning. Medicines were checked and managed safely.
“Medicines were managed safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Good oversight
The new manager had identified development needs. Audits, action plans and external checks were used to monitor care and safety.
“Quality assurance processes, such as audits, were in place and ensured the registered manager had the information they needed to monitor the safety and quality of the care provided.” from the report
Staff team changing
needs fixingRelatives reported higher staff turnover and increased use of agency staff. Inspectors said this was settling as a new team was put in place.
“Relatives told us there had been a higher turnover of staff which had led to the use of more agency staff, but this was settling with a new staffing team in place.” from the report
Care plans being updated
needs fixingThe home was rewriting and updating all care plans. Families should check that information remains accurate before each stay.
“The service was in the process of re-writing and updating all care plans, which were maintained in paper copy at the service.” from the report
Repairs and decoration
minorSome areas needed decorative attention, and repairs to external fencing were still part of the improvement work.
“Some areas were now needing decorative attention, and the registered manager told us these were on a service improvement plan for the coming year.” from the report
Liberty safeguards
needs fixingThe home was making applications for authorisation covering restrictions such as locked external doors. Families should ask about the status of the application relevant to their relative.
“Following taking recent advice the service was making application for a DoLS authorisation for each person using the service.” from the report
- 01How far has the new staff team settled, and how often will agency staff support my relative?
- 02Has my relative's care plan been fully updated, including their communication, health, positioning and lifestyle needs?
- 03What is the current position on the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards application for my relative?
- 04Have the external fencing repairs and planned internal repairs been completed?
- 05How will you confirm medicines and other needs before each respite stay?
This was a planned inspection of the care home, including accommodation and personal care; the separate day services were outside CQC regulation and were not inspected. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 April 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, June 2017
Dimensions Baily Thomas House Haysoms Drive was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and flexible support, with some medicines and night staffing issues to monitor.
This was a comprehensive inspection over 24 and 25 May 2017. One inspector spoke with the manager, staff, people using the service, relatives and a local authority representative. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, recruitment files and safety records.
The home provides planned respite stays for people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found that people felt safe and well cared for. Risks were assessed, staffing was adjusted to people's needs, and staff were trained and checked before working.
People were supported to make choices and take part in daily activities. Staff respected privacy, dignity and consent. The home worked flexibly with families and other professionals, and care plans described people's wishes and needs.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home had also been rated Good at the October 2014 inspection, so the rating remained unchanged.
Kind and respectful care
Staff built warm relationships and supported people to make choices, keep their privacy and develop independence. Families and professionals also described the care as caring.
“Staff supported people's rights, dignity and privacy in the way they worked.” from the report
Flexible support
The home worked with people and families to arrange respite stays around their needs. It could also provide emergency or short-notice support when appropriate.
“The staff continued to provide a responsive and flexible service.” from the report
Good staff preparation
New staff completed a recognised induction and staff received ongoing training, supervision and competency checks in important areas such as medicines and moving and handling.
“All recent and newly appointed staff were inducted using the nationally recognised Care Certificate induction.” from the report
Positive leadership
People, families and professionals praised the manager's approach. The service used health and safety checks, medicines audits, supervision records and improvement planning.
“People and their relatives praised the approach of the registered manager.” from the report
Medicines recording space
needs fixingThe medicines administration records did not have enough space for some double-signature records and records of absence or refusal. The manager agreed to consider changing the records.
“The medicines administration record sheets provided limited space for double signatory records and records of absence or refusal” from the report
Previous medicines errors
seriousTwo medicines errors had happened in the previous 12 months. The report says these were notified, families were informed and remedial action was taken.
“Two medicines errors had occurred in the previous 12 months.” from the report
Waking night recruitment
needs fixingRecruiting to waking night posts had been more difficult because of the varied night staffing arrangements. The home used known bank and agency staff to improve consistency.
“Owing to the varied night time staffing, it had proved more difficult to recruit to waking night posts.” from the report
Regional feedback surveys
minorMost surveys were collected and analysed at regional level. Inspectors said this could hide issues specific to the home.
“However, these were collated regionally, which could mask issues within an individual service.” from the report
- 01How are medicines checked after the two errors mentioned in the report?
- 02Have the medicines administration records been changed to provide enough space for all required entries?
- 03How are waking night shifts staffed, and how do you make sure agency or bank staff know the person's needs?
- 04How will you collect and review feedback that relates specifically to this home rather than only at regional level?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in planning and reviewing respite stays?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, based on observations, discussions and samples of care plans and service records. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 June 2017 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 Dimensions Baily Thomas House Haysoms Drive
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Dimensions Baily Thomas House Haysoms Drive →
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Dimensions Baily Thomas House Haysoms Drive →
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 January 2012.
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
42 live-in carers within about an hour of West Berkshire
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. 36 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“Titus has compassion, patience, a great sense of humour and a very professional attitude.”
“Barbara treated my mother-in-law with enormous love and compassion and provided an environment where she could feel safe and seen”
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.