CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Five Gables Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Rated Good overall, but Safe Requires Improvement because faulty equipment increased the risk of harm.
Inspectors visited without notice on 15 and 16 July 2019. They spoke with seven people, five staff and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment, training and quality records.
People were generally treated kindly and respectfully. Staff knew people well, supported their choices, provided suitable training and helped with food, healthcare, activities and end of life care.
The main concern was safety. A motion sensor for one person at risk of falls was not working properly, and bed rail checks were not routinely recorded. Inspectors also saw busy periods when people had to wait for help.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were Good. Safe was Requires Improvement, meaning some aspects were not always safe and there was an increased risk that people could be harmed.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives gave generally positive feedback. Staff knew people's preferences and supported dignity, independence, choice and faith.
“Staff were kind, knew people well and treated them with respect.” from the report
Training and healthcare
Staff received induction, training, supervision and competency checks. People could access healthcare professionals and specialist advice when needed.
“Staff were supported in their role; they received an induction, comprehensive training and supervision.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's needs and preferences and were reviewed when circumstances changed. People were offered choices and relatives were involved where they wished.
“The provider developed care plans with information for staff about people's needs and preferences.” from the report
Open management
The management team was described as approachable. The home had regular audits, meetings and ways for people, relatives and staff to give feedback.
“People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the management team and described them as approachable.” from the report
Faulty falls sensor
seriousA motion sensor for one person at risk of falls was not working effectively. The person fell during the first inspection day, and staff were not alerted by the sensor.
“The motion sensor equipment for one person at risk of falls was not working effectively.” from the report
Bed rail checks
needs fixingStaff did not routinely record checks to show that bed rails were fitted correctly and being used safely. The provider agreed to start this immediately.
“Staff did not routinely record checks of the bed rails to ensure they were fitted correctly and being used safely.” from the report
Busy periods
needs fixingInspectors saw people unattended in communal areas with limited social interaction while staff helped others. One person waited for personal care.
“One person had to wait to receive the personal care they needed.” from the report
Recruitment records
needs fixingRecruitment checks were carried out, but some records were incomplete. One file did not fully show that the person had not worked unsupervised while waiting for a DBS check.
“We recommend the provider takes action to improve record keeping in relation to recruitment, to evidence that checks are robust.” from the report
Limited social interaction
minorSome people sat for periods with limited interaction from staff, and activities were not available on the first inspection day.
“Some people sat for periods with limited social interaction from staff.” from the report
- 01How do you now test motion sensors and other equipment, and how do you record those checks?
- 02How do you check that bed rails are fitted correctly and used safely?
- 03How do you arrange staffing during busy times so people do not wait for personal care?
- 04What changes have you made to recruitment records, especially while staff are waiting for DBS checks?
- 05How do you provide more individual activities and social interaction for people who may otherwise sit alone?
This was an unannounced scheduled inspection that looked at the overall quality of the care home and all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 October 2019 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, February 2017
Five Gables Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with some concerns about morning staffing and communication.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 19 January 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, a relative, staff, the cook and the managers. They also reviewed care records, staff records and other documents.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that medicines were now managed safely. This improved on the previous inspection, when medicine records were incomplete and instructions for medicines given when needed were missing.
People were supported by trained staff and received kind, respectful and individual care. Inspectors also found that staff responded to health needs, people were involved in decisions, activities were available and managers used feedback to make improvements. Some people and staff thought more staff might be needed in the mornings, and a small number of people said staff could sometimes be impatient.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff respond with kindness and reassurance. People were supported with dignity, privacy, choice and independence.
“Staff interacted with people in a kind, compassionate and caring way.” from the report
Individual care
Care records included people's preferences, routines and important information. Staff knew people well and supported them in the way they wanted.
“People's care records were person centred and focused on providing them with care and support in the way in which they wanted.” from the report
Visible management
Managers spent time with people, listened to their views and involved people, relatives and staff in improving the home.
“The registered managers led the service well, were a visible presence throughout the inspection and were respected and well-liked by all the people we spoke with.” from the report
Morning staffing
needs fixingSome people and staff felt more support was needed in the mornings, when people needed the most help. Managers had identified this and planned to add another staff member and adjust management hours.
“The staff we spoke with felt the number of staff on duty was normally sufficient, but occasionally they felt more support was needed in the mornings when people needed most help.” from the report
Occasional impatience
minorTwo people said staff could sometimes be a little impatient. They also praised the staff highly overall.
“two people told us that staff could occasionally be a little impatient; however both of these people also praised the staff highly.” from the report
Food information storage
needs fixingDietary and allergy information was available but was not always kept in the kitchen, where it would be needed. The manager said this would be corrected.
“However this was not always stored in kitchen where it would be needed.” from the report
Complaints information
minorThe complaints policy was available, but its layout could make it difficult for some people to understand. The manager said it would be reviewed.
“We noted the layout of the policy may make it difficult for some people to understand.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to morning staffing, and are there now enough staff when people need the most help?
- 02How do you make sure staff understand each person's health condition, preferences and communication needs?
- 03Where is each person's dietary and allergy information kept, and how is it checked before meals?
- 04How do you monitor and address concerns that staff may sometimes appear impatient?
- 05Can you show me how residents and relatives can make a complaint and how complaints are followed up?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five questions and reviewing people's care records, staff records and other records. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 February 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 Five Gables Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 October 2016.
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.