CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Dinsdale Lodge Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that people lived in a safe environment, risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely and enough staff were deployed. Safeguarding and infection control systems were also in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open culture, staff who understood their roles, effective quality monitoring and strong partnerships with health and social care professionals.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe care, suitable staffing and strong management during a focused inspection.
Inspectors visited on 5 and 9 January 2023 without giving advance notice. They spoke with five people, one relative and eight staff. They checked three care records, medicines records and other records about how the home was run.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found that risks, medicines, staffing, recruitment, safeguarding and infection control were managed safely. People received their medicines as prescribed and there were enough staff to meet their needs.
The inspection only looked closely at Safe and Well-led. The other three question ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection in 2017 when the service was also rated Good. The overall rating remains Good.
Safe medicines
Medicines were managed by trained staff and people received them as prescribed. The home also assessed whether people could manage their own medicines safely.
“Medicines were managed safely. Competent trained staff followed the appropriate guidance for the management, storage, administration and disposal of medicines.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found that staffing levels met people's needs. Recruitment checks included references and Disclosure and Barring Service checks.
“Enough staff were deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The manager reviewed safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents for patterns. Learning points were used to reduce the chance of further incidents.
“Information gathered from safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents was analysed to identify trends or patterns.” from the report
Open management
The home had an open and transparent culture. People, relatives and staff were encouraged to give feedback, and inspectors found that this was used to make improvements.
“The provider and manager understood their duty of candour. The home had an open and transparent culture.” from the report
Working with professionals
The home worked with health and social care professionals to support joined-up care and helped external professionals record additional clinical information when requested.
“The home had developed strong partnerships with health and social care professionals to ensure people received joined up care.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are emergency evacuation plans reviewed for each person, and when was my relative's plan last checked?
- 02What assessment would you complete if my relative wanted to manage some or all of their own medicines?
- 03How do you record and act on learning from accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns?
- 04How do you use feedback from people, relatives and staff to make improvements?
- 05How would you work with health and social care professionals if my relative needed additional clinical monitoring?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the previous inspection in 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 February 2023 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, December 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with minor issues about medicine storage temperatures and cleanliness.
This was an unannounced inspection on 23 and 27 November 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, family members and staff. They reviewed care records, staff files, medicines, audits and the building, and observed care.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable training, safe recruitment, person-centred care plans, respectful care and a full programme of activities.
The inspection checked improvements needed after the previous inspection in September 2016. Inspectors found improvements in all the areas previously identified, including care records and quality monitoring.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff speaking politely, respecting privacy and dignity, and supporting people to do things for themselves where possible.
“Staff treated people with dignity and respect and independence was promoted.” from the report
Person-centred plans
Care records included people's preferences, backgrounds, health needs, communication needs and wishes for end of life care.
“Care plans were written in a person-centred way.” from the report
Activities and community links
The home had individual social activity plans and a broad programme, including activities designed for people living with dementia.
“The provider protected people from social isolation.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider used regular checks, audits, meetings and surveys. Actions were recorded when issues were found.
“The provider had an effective quality assurance process in place.” from the report
Medicine refrigerator temperatures
needs fixingSome recent refrigerator temperature recordings were above the recommended level. The home said this was linked to high stock levels and frequent door opening, and had ordered a larger refrigerator.
“We identified that some recent refrigerator temperature recordings were above the recommended level.” from the report
Dust on extractor fans
minorTwo extractor fans had accumulated dust. The home acted before the second visit and added the fans to cleaning schedules.
“Communal bathrooms and toilets were generally clean however we saw an accumulation of dust on two extractor fans.” from the report
- 01Has the larger medicine refrigerator been installed, and how are its temperatures now checked and recorded?
- 02What refurbishment work, including new carpets and dementia-friendly changes, has been completed since the inspection?
- 03How are my relative's personal preferences and choices kept up to date in their care plan?
- 04What activities would be available for my relative, based on their interests and abilities?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in decisions about end of life care or changes in support?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC key questions and checking improvements required after the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 December 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 Dinsdale Lodge Care Home
6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- August 2015Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2015InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 December 2010.
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
43 live-in carers within about an hour of Hartlepool
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 £970 to £1,120 a week. 40 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“I found Alison to be kind , caring helpful concencious... Alison has a heart of gold”
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.