CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 82 Willowdale
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from harm, risks were managed and staffing levels were sufficient. Medicines, recruitment and infection control were also found to be safely managed.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and reviewed, and staff had suitable training and knowledge. Staff worked with health and social care professionals, although one relative wanted more staff who could drive.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff knew people's routines and preferences and treated them with dignity and respect. People were supported to make choices, maintain relationships and develop independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported with communication, community activities and complaints, and inspectors found that their concerns were addressed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a positive culture and clear staff roles. Audits, surveys and action plans were used to monitor quality and make improvements.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some minor concerns about healthy choices and transport support.
This was an unannounced inspection on 11 November 2019. One inspector spoke with one person, the manager and staff, reviewed care and medicine records, checked the premises and looked at staffing and quality records. The inspector also spoke with relatives after the visit.
The home supported two people with learning disabilities or autism. Inspectors found that people were safe, their medicines were managed properly and staff understood their needs. People were treated with kindness, involved in decisions and supported to be independent and active in the community.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection was also rated Good. The report says the home will continue to be monitored and may be inspected sooner if concerning information is received.
Safe medicines
People received medicines as prescribed. Staff were trained and checked as competent, and records showed when medicines had been given.
“The provider safely managed medicines. People received them according to prescribed instructions.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff understood people's routines and preferences. People were supported with dignity, privacy, choice and independence.
“Staff were calm but offered appropriate guidance and support.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were supported to follow their interests and take part in activities suited to them. They regularly went out into the community.
“People went out every day, no matter the weather.” from the report
Quality oversight
The manager carried out regular checks and used action plans to address shortfalls and plan improvements.
“The registered manager completed regular quality checks and audits.” from the report
Healthy eating and weight
minorStaff said that some food choices were not always healthy. Relatives also raised concerns about weight gain, so families should ask how this is being managed.
“Staff told us that people's dietary requirements were sometimes a challenge to maintain, as people knew what they liked but the choices they made were not always healthy ones.” from the report
Staff able to drive
minorOne relative felt more staff should have passed their driving test to help people go out in vehicles. Inspectors still found staff suitably trained overall.
“A relative felt there could be more staff who had passed their driving test, to help when people wanted to go out in their vehicles, but otherwise they were suitably trained.” from the report
- 01How do you support people to make healthy food choices and manage weight gain?
- 02How many staff have passed their driving test, and how do you support outings when they are unavailable?
- 03How are each person's communication needs recorded and shared with staff and health professionals?
- 04How are care plans reviewed when a person's routines, needs or preferences change?
- 05How do people and their families raise concerns, and how are the resulting actions recorded?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; all five ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 December 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, July 2017
Foxglove Care Limited - 82 Willowdale was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 31 May 2017. One inspector spoke with a person using the home, a relative, the manager and a staff member. They reviewed care files, staff training, medicines, complaints, safety records and quality checks.
The inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staffing, recruitment, premises safety and medicines were well managed. Staff were trained, supervised and understood people's needs.
People were supported with kindness, choice and independence. Care plans were personalised and reviewed. Activities, family contact, healthcare and complaints were handled well. The home was rated Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led, and it remained Good since the previous inspection.
Protecting people from harm
Safeguarding systems, staff training and risk assessments were in place. Inspectors found that risks were reduced to help people avoid injury or harm.
“Systems and practices ensured that people who used the service were protected from the risk of harm and abuse.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, given, recorded and disposed of safely. People did not run out of their medicines.
“Medicines were obtained in a timely way so that people did not run out of them.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people's needs and supported them in a kind way. Inspectors saw that privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
“Staff knew people's needs well, offered guidance and maintained a kind approach when they offered support.” from the report
Personalised support
Care files were written around each person's needs, choices and outcomes. Plans and risk assessments were reviewed monthly or when needs changed.
“Care files for people that used the service reflected their needs well and were person-centred.” from the report
Quality checks
The home used audits, surveys and meetings to monitor care and identify improvements.
“An effective system checked the quality of the service using audits, satisfaction surveys and meetings.” from the report
Privacy and the seizure monitor
minorOne person used a monitor to alert staff during seizures when alone in their bedroom. Inspectors said it did not provide privacy, and a more suitable sensor was being sought.
“This was being reviewed for a more appropriate sensor alert system and would be replaced once the right item was found, as the monitor did not afford the person any privacy.” from the report
- 01Has the seizure monitor that did not provide enough privacy now been replaced with a more suitable system?
- 02How will you make sure my relative's care plan and risk assessments are reviewed when their needs change?
- 03How do you make sure there are enough staff for one-to-one support during the day and safe staffing at night?
- 04How will my relative be supported to choose activities, meals, routines and outings?
- 05How will my relative or our family raise a complaint, and how will you tell us what action was taken?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, and all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 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 82 Willowdale
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 April 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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Kingston upon Hull, City of
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 £1,350 a week. 12 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
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.