CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Dimensions Somerset Selwyn House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk assessments, safe recruitment checks and staff who understood safeguarding. Some medicine guidance and storage temperature checks were missing.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the training and skills needed, and people had access to health professionals. Inspectors found that regular reviews for some delegated medical procedures were not always arranged, and one capacity decision was not properly recorded at first.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and patient. People’s privacy, dignity, choices, cultural needs and religious beliefs were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised, including communication needs, wishes and goals. Staff supported activities, community access, complaints and transitions to other placements.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and provider had systems to monitor quality and make improvements. Staff were supported, although they said changes at provider level were not always clear.
What inspectors found, June 2018
Dimensions Somerset Selwyn House was rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some medicines and health review issues to address.
This was an unannounced inspection on 17 and 23 May 2018. It was the first inspection of the home under the new provider. The inspector spoke with people, staff, a relative and health and social care professionals, and examined care records, medicines, staff files and quality checks.
Overall, the home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People appeared comfortable and happy with staff. Inspectors found enough staff, good care planning, kind interactions and strong links with health professionals.
There were some shortfalls. Guidance for some as-needed medicines was missing, medicine storage temperatures were not being checked, and regular reviews by professionals who had delegated medical tasks were not always arranged. These issues were identified during the inspection and the manager said action would be taken.
Personalised care
Care plans covered people’s communication, mobility, health, eating and drinking needs, life history and goals. Staff knew people well and updated plans when needs changed.
“Peoples care plans were personalised and considered their needs and wishes.” from the report
Safe staffing
Staff numbers were adjusted when emergency placements arrived. Consistent agency staff were used when needed, and recruitment checks were completed before new staff started.
“People were supported by enough staff to meet their needs and keep them safe.” from the report
Health support
The home worked closely with health and social care professionals. Inspectors saw examples of people receiving support with dental care, medicines and other health needs.
“People had access to medical and community healthcare support because there were strong links with them.” from the report
As-needed medicine guidance
needs fixingThere was no guidance to make sure staff gave some as-needed medicines consistently. The manager said this would be put in place.
“However, for 'as required' medicines there was no guidance to ensure staff were administering it consistently.” from the report
Medicine storage temperatures
needs fixingTemperatures were not being checked in each locked medicine cupboard. Inspectors said medicines could be damaged if temperatures became too high.
“Neither was the temperature being checked for each locked cupboard.” from the report
Reviews of medical procedures
needs fixingThe manager had not ensured regular visits from health professionals who had delegated some medical tasks. Inspectors said this created a potential risk to a person’s health.
“There were times the management had not ensured there were regular visits from the health professionals who had delegated the medical tasks.” from the report
Capacity record
needs fixingOne person did not initially have a capacity assessment and best-interest decision recorded for a regular intrusive medical procedure. The manager said this was followed up after the inspection.
“However, one person lacked a capacity assessment and best interest decision for an intrusive medical procedure being completed regularly.” from the report
Specialist diets
minorOn the first inspection day, one person’s soft food was mixed together rather than separated. Staff corrected this by the second day and added clearer kitchen information.
“On the first day one person had soft food all mixed together rather than served so each food was separate.” from the report
- 01How do you now check the temperature of every locked medicine cupboard?
- 02What written guidance is now used for each person’s as-needed medicines?
- 03How often do health professionals review delegated medical procedures, such as tube feeding or medicines through a tube?
- 04How do you record capacity assessments and best-interest decisions for intrusive medical procedures?
- 05How will you keep families and staff informed about changes at provider level?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC questions and both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 June 2018 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 Somerset Selwyn House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- June 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Dimensions Somerset Selwyn House →
- April 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 April 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
76 live-in carers within about two hours of Somerset
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 £1,370 a week. 62 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.