CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Dovetail House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe, risks were assessed and managed, and there were enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines, infection control and investigations of incidents were also found to be managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed, staff were trained and people were supported with food, drink and health care. Some mental capacity assessments lacked detail, but the provider updated them after the inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were friendly and respectful. People were supported to make choices, remain independent and be treated with dignity.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and people could choose how to spend their time. The home supported activities, relationships, communication needs, religious beliefs and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a management team, regular checks on care quality and a clear organisational structure. People, relatives and staff were given different ways to share their views.
What inspectors found, March 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records needing improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 11 February 2020. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff supported people with medicines, health care, food, activities, relationships and making their own choices.
Inspectors found two areas needing attention. Some mental capacity assessments lacked detail, and people said they were not given a choice of food even though alternatives were available. The provider updated the capacity assessments after the inspection.
The overall Good rating means inspectors found consistently good care and management at the time of this inspection. The previous inspection rating was also Good, published on 26 July 2017.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff understood how to recognise and report abuse or other concerns.
“People continued to feel safe living in the home.” from the report
Respectful care
Inspectors saw kind interactions. Staff listened to people and supported them to make their own choices and stay independent.
“People were cared for by friendly and respectful staff.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were supported to keep in touch with family, follow their interests and take part in activities in the home and community.
“The staff supported people to go on holidays of their choosing twice a year and supported them to get out into the local community.” from the report
Good management checks
The management team used regular audits, meetings and feedback to monitor care and address concerns.
“Regular audits to check the quality of care were conducted, including meal time experience and nutrition and hydration audits.” from the report
Limited menu choice
needs fixingPeople said they were not given a choice of food and the daily menu had only one option. Inspectors saw that people could request alternatives, and some had meals they had specifically asked for.
“People said they were not given a choice of food and we saw the daily menu only had one option.” from the report
Capacity assessments lacked detail
needs fixingSome decision-specific mental capacity assessments did not contain enough detail. The management team was told about this and the provider later sent evidence that the assessments had been updated.
“We found some mental capacity assessments, although decision specific, did lack detail.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure residents are offered a genuine choice of meals each day?
- 02What changes were made to the mental capacity assessments after the inspection?
- 03How are individual risks and support plans reviewed when a person's needs or choices change?
- 04How can my relative and our family raise concerns or give feedback about their care?
- 05What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the care and accommodation provided by the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 March 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, July 2017
Dovetail House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with strong management oversight.
This was an unannounced inspection on 15 May 2017. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and managers. They also checked care plans, medicine records, staff files, audits and other records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, safe medicines handling, suitable risk assessments and good support with health, food and drink.
People were treated kindly and respectfully. Staff knew people's needs, supported their choices and helped them take part in activities and maintain relationships. The home had systems to listen to concerns and monitor the quality of care.
Safe staffing and care
The home had enough staff for people's needs. Staff used risk assessments and equipment safely, and recruitment checks were completed.
“There was enough staff to meet people's needs and staff able to respond to people's needs in a timely manner.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People said staff were kind and knew them well. Inspectors saw relaxed, positive interactions and support for privacy and independence.
“People's choices, likes and dislikes were respected by staff who knew them well and people were treated in a kind and caring manner.” from the report
Individual support and activities
Care plans reflected people's different needs and communication styles. People were supported to choose activities, go out and maintain important relationships.
“People were supported to take part in a varied range of social activities within the home and the broader community.” from the report
Good management oversight
Managers were seen as approachable and staff felt supported. Audits and reviews helped identify improvements to the environment, cleanliness and care records.
“There were robust systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
Some legal authorisations were pending
needs fixingSeveral applications under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were awaiting assessment by the local authority. One temporary authorisation was awaiting further assessment.
“The service had a number of applications awaiting assessment by the local authority.” from the report
- 01What is the current position of any Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications?
- 02How will you assess and update my relative's risks and care plan when their needs change?
- 03What staffing levels and staff training are currently in place for people with mental health, learning disability and brain injury needs?
- 04How are residents involved in choosing activities and reviewing their care?
- 05How are medicines checked, including medicines given by visiting health professionals?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, based on discussions, observations and checks of care, staffing and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 July 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 Dovetail House
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 January 2011.
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
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
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 £980 to £1,260 a week. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
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.