CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Foxhole House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- The home had suitable staffing, risk assessments, safeguarding training and infection control arrangements. Inspectors found gaps in records for as-needed creams and for recording whether as-needed medicines had worked.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff understood the person's needs and worked with relatives and health professionals. The person was supported with their diet, fitness, healthcare and decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated the person with warmth, patience, dignity and respect. The person had ways to communicate choices and feelings, although the communication care plan needed more detail.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support was organised around the person's preferences, communication needs and quality-of-life goals. The person had meaningful activities and flexibility about how they spent their time.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Management was visible and involved, and regular reviews, audits and feedback were used to improve support. Staff described an open and learning-focused team culture.
What inspectors found, April 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some records and recruitment processes needing improvement.
This was the first inspection of the newly registered home. One inspector visited on 6 April 2022, spoke with the registered manager and staff, and contacted a relative by phone.
The inspector reviewed the person's care plan, recruitment records, health monitoring, infection control and medicines records. They found that the person was safe, treated with kindness and supported to make choices, build independence and take part in activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home supported one person who was a younger adult with a learning disability or autism.
Choice and independence
The home supported the person to make choices, develop skills and take more control over everyday life. Positive risk-taking was encouraged where appropriate.
“The model of care and setting maximised people's choice, control and independence.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
Staff understood the person's individual needs and communication style. They treated the person as an equal and protected their dignity.
“Staff talked to and about the person as their equal and showed warmth and respect in their interactions.” from the report
Personalised activities
Activities and new experiences were adapted to the person's interests and readiness. Staff supported leisure activities, voluntary work and everyday tasks.
“The person had access to a range of meaningful activities that met their personal preferences.” from the report
Good partnership with family and professionals
Staff worked closely with relatives and health professionals. This helped the person access healthcare and achieve improvements in fitness and mobility.
“The staff team worked closely with the person's relatives and valued information they shared about the person's needs or preferences.” from the report
Active management and review
Managers and staff regularly reviewed all aspects of the person's life and used audits and feedback to identify improvements.
“A full review was carried out each month covering all aspects of the person's life.” from the report
As-needed medicine records
needs fixingRecords did not initially explain when and where prescribed creams should be used or what support was needed. Staff also did not record whether as-needed medicines, including pain relief, had worked. The home said it updated these records after the inspection.
“When PRN medicine was administered to the person, including pain relief, staff did not record whether it had been effective or not.” from the report
Communication care plan
needs fixingThe communication care plan did not include all the person's usual words, gestures or expressions. It also did not explain how staff would recognise pain. The manager updated it during the inspection.
“There was a communication care plan in place for the person but it did not include all words, gestures or expressions commonly used by the person to make choices or express their views.” from the report
Involvement in recruitment
minorThe recruitment and induction process was suitable, but the person, their family and staff had not been involved in choosing new staff.
“The person, their family or staff had not been involved in the recruitment process to help ensure new staff were well suited to the service.” from the report
- 01How do you now record when and where as-needed creams should be applied, and what support is needed?
- 02How do you record whether as-needed medicines, including pain relief, have worked?
- 03How does the communication care plan show the person's usual words, gestures and signs of pain?
- 04How will the person, their family and staff be involved in recruiting future staff?
- 05How are the person's activities, goals and progress reviewed with the person and their family?
This was the first inspection of the newly registered home and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 April 2022 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 Foxhole House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- April 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 November 2020.
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
10 live-in carers within about two hours of Cornwall
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 £1,200 a week. 8 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“He had been a little anxious before she arrived, but has since stated that he would be very happy for her to care for him again”
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.