CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 2 Newton Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. There were enough staff, risk assessments were kept up to date, medicines were given as prescribed and recruitment checks were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and regular supervision. People's health and dietary needs were assessed and they could access healthcare professionals. Inspectors recommended a review of Mental Capacity Act and liberty safeguards arrangements.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind, caring and patient. Staff listened, respected privacy and dignity, and supported people to make everyday choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was tailored to people's needs, interests and communication. People were supported with activities, day services, independence skills and involvement in the local community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Staff found managers supportive and approachable. Audits, meetings and feedback systems were in place, although inspectors asked for more regular external audits and feedback after each stay.
What inspectors found, November 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised respite care, but asked the home to review some liberty decisions and feedback arrangements.
This was a planned, announced comprehensive inspection on 31 October 2018. One inspector spoke with people, staff, relatives and managers, and reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files, staffing rotas, maintenance records and quality checks.
The home provided short-term respite care for up to three people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practices, suitable risk assessments and good hygiene. People were treated with kindness, involved in decisions and supported to take part in activities and the local community.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The rating was unchanged from the previous inspection in May 2016. Inspectors made recommendations about checking whether formal authorisation was needed when people could not leave without staff support, and about gathering feedback more regularly.
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were based on the number of people staying and their needs. Staff could contact managers outside office hours for advice.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff available to keep people safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as caring and patient. Inspectors saw people relaxed and comfortable, with staff listening and respecting privacy.
“People and their relatives told us they were treated with kindness and care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's likes, dislikes, preferred routines and communication needs. People helped make choices about daily activities and menus.
“All support plans were written in a person-centred way, outlining for the staff how to provide individually tailored care and support.” from the report
Activities and community life
People were supported to follow their interests, develop independence skills and take part in activities both at the home and in the community.
“People were encouraged and supported to engage with activities and to be part of the local community.” from the report
Good safety systems
Risk assessments, medicines training, maintenance checks and recruitment checks were in place. Staff understood safeguarding procedures.
“Risk assessments were in place that were regularly evaluated to ensure they remained relevant, reduced risk and kept people safe.” from the report
Liberty safeguards
needs fixingInspectors found that some people could not go out alone because staff considered them vulnerable, but there were no formal liberty safeguards authorisations. The home agreed to seek advice and assessments.
“We found no DoLS were in place and we were told by the registered manager people did not go out without staff support as they would be vulnerable if they left the building and were unescorted in the community.” from the report
More regular feedback
minorInspectors said the home should seek people's and relatives' views after each stay and consider a forum for people or their representatives.
“We advised more regular feedback could be obtained from people and relatives at the end of each stay.” from the report
External checks
minorThe home completed regular internal audits, but inspectors advised that external audits should happen more often to check care and safety and review the manager's audits.
“We advised a more regular external audit should take place to ensure the care and safety of people who used the service and to check the manager's audits.” from the report
- 01What action has been taken to check whether any person staying here needs a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisation?
- 02How are best-interest decisions recorded when a person cannot leave the home without staff support?
- 03How do you now collect feedback from people and relatives after each respite stay?
- 04Have you introduced a forum or other way for people or their representatives to help shape the service?
- 05How often are external quality and safety audits now carried out?
This was a comprehensive inspection of the care home, including the premises and care provided; the separate outreach service was not inspected. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 November 2018 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 2 Newton Road
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 February 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Westmorland and Furness
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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
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.