CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Duxbury House Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found good safeguarding awareness, risk assessments, medicines procedures, infection control and recruitment checks. People said they felt safe and received their medicines on time.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- Some care plan instructions about mobile phones and online content could have been restrictive. Inspectors recommended reviewing guidance on care planning and decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and respectful and supported people's privacy, independence, backgrounds and choices. People were involved through discussions, meetings and questionnaires.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's histories, wishes and preferences. The home provided activities, supported communication and gave people information about how to raise concerns.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open, calm and approachable culture. The manager used audits, feedback and partnership working to monitor and improve care.
What inspectors found, November 2021
Duxbury House Residential Care Home was rated Good overall, but Effective was Requires Improvement because some care planning could restrict people's choices.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 27 and 28 September 2021. They spoke with four people, a staff member and the registered manager. They also checked the building, care records, medicines, staffing, infection control and management systems.
People told inspectors they felt safe. The home was clean, medicines were given on time, and staff were calm, patient and kind. Inspectors also found personalised care, activities, good links with health services and an open management culture.
The main shortfall was in care planning. Some recorded instructions about mobile phones and online content could have been restrictive, although inspectors saw people moving freely and making choices. The overall rating stayed Good, but Effective fell from Good to Requires Improvement.
People felt safe
Staff understood safeguarding procedures and used risk assessments to support people safely. People told inspectors they felt safe living in the home.
“People told us they felt safe living at Duxbury House.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Staff were trained and regularly checked as competent to manage medicines. Records were completed in line with national guidance.
“Medicines records were completed in line with national guidelines.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff treated people with kindness and respect. They supported privacy, independence and awareness of people's backgrounds and life stories.
“Staff were consistently kind and respectful, ensuring each person maintained their independence and privacy.” from the report
Personalised activities
The home provided regular and occasional activities to support wellbeing and social skills. These included walks, games, films and access to college.
“The registered manager and staff provided regular and ad hoc activities to maximise people's wellbeing and social skills.” from the report
Open management
People and staff were encouraged to share concerns and ideas. The manager used feedback and audits to make changes and check safety and welfare.
“People talked about an open culture where they were encouraged to raise any concerns or suggestions about improving the service.” from the report
Care plans may restrict choices
needs fixingSome care plans contained instructions about how long people could use mobile phones and what online content was suitable. Inspectors said these could imply restrictive practice and recommended a review.
“We found elements of care plans included recorded actions to assist people that were authoritarian in nature, which could infer restrictive practice.” from the report
Effective rating fell
needs fixingThe Effective rating changed from Good at the previous inspection to Requires Improvement. Inspectors said care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or were inconsistent.
“At this inspection this key question has now deteriorated to requires improvement.” from the report
- 01How have you reviewed care plans about mobile phone use and online content since this inspection?
- 02How do you make sure support is the least restrictive option when someone makes a decision that carries some risk?
- 03What changes have you made to improve the Effective rating, which fell from Good to Requires Improvement?
- 04How do people influence meal choices, activities and changes to their care?
- 05How do you check that medicines continue to be given safely and on time?
This inspection looked at all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control, and followed concerns about food hygiene, choice and liberty, finances and access to medical treatment. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 November 2021 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
Duxbury House Residential Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no major shortfalls.
The unannounced inspection took place on 11 October 2017. One inspector spoke with five people living at the home, staff and the registered manager. They looked at the building, records for three people, staff training and the systems used to manage safety and quality.
People told inspectors they felt safe and well supported. Medicines were stored and given safely. Staffing levels were sufficient, care records included risk assessments, and staff understood safeguarding. The home was clean and its safety checks were up to date.
Inspectors found staff were kind, experienced and respectful. People were involved in their support plans, and records described their needs, preferences and life histories. The home provided activities and trips, although there was no formal activities programme.
The overall rating and all five question ratings were Good. The home had also been rated Good at the previous inspection on 27 August 2015, so the report says it remained Good.
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found that risks were assessed and reviewed, medicines were handled safely, and the home had suitable safety systems.
“We found medicines were stored securely and administered with a safe approach.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff were seen treating people with patience, kindness and respect. People said they felt cared for.
“We observed staff engaged with people in a friendly, caring, patient and knowledgeable approach.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans included people's backgrounds, preferences and wishes. People were involved in reviewing their care.
“Care records were detailed, personalised and contained information about each person's backgrounds, life histories and preferences.” from the report
Good oversight
The home used regular audits and meetings to monitor care, safety and people's wellbeing.
“The registered manager regularly completed a range of audits to assess quality assurance and the safety and wellbeing of everyone at Duxbury.” from the report
No formal activities programme
minorInspectors noted that there was no formal programme of activities. They did see regular events, trips and indoor activities, so this was a limited shortfall rather than a finding that activities were absent.
“A formal programme of activities was not in place.” from the report
- 01How do you plan and record activities for each person, given that inspectors found there was no formal activities programme?
- 02How will you make sure activities continue to match each person's interests, goals and abilities?
- 03How often are medicines audits completed, and what happens if an audit identifies a problem?
- 04How are people's support plans reviewed with them and updated when their needs or preferences change?
- 05How do people and families raise concerns, and how are those concerns recorded and resolved?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led; the previous inspection on 27 August 2015 had also rated the home Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 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 Duxbury House Residential Care Home
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Duxbury House Residential Care Home →
- December 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Duxbury House Residential Care Home →
- September 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 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
32 live-in carers within about an hour of Blackpool
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 £1,250 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during 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.