CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Godolphin House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that people were safe, risks were managed, medicines were given as prescribed and infection control measures were in place. Staffing had been challenging, but records showed safe staffing levels had been consistently achieved.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received support from trained staff and could access healthcare professionals. Inspectors found that food quality and support with eating and drinking were appropriate, although people said food had declined for a period and was improving.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. The report says the previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating, but it does not give that rating in the supplied text.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. The report says the previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating, but it does not give that rating in the supplied text.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a registered manager, supported by senior staff, and inspectors found effective audits and quality checks. Staff said the leadership team was approachable and supportive.
What inspectors found, November 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, effective and kind care, with a recommendation about privacy when using one toilet.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 21 October 2022. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, staff and healthcare professionals. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, accident records and management information.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were each rated Good. People said they felt safe, staff were kind, medicines were given as prescribed and staffing levels were consistently safe, despite recent recruitment difficulties.
The inspectors found some areas needing attention. One toilet next to the lounge had no lock, which could affect people's privacy. The home was recommended to seek guidance on protecting people's dignity when people use this toilet independently.
This inspection did not assess Caring or Responsive. The report says the previous ratings for those areas were used when calculating the overall rating. The home had also remained Good since its previous rating, published on 19 May 2018.
Safe staffing
The home had enough staff on the inspection day, and rotas showed that safe staffing levels had generally been maintained. Four additional staff had recently been recruited.
“Rotas showed that although the service had experienced some staffing challenges, safe staffing levels had been consistently achieved.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were stored and given safely. Records were complete, staff were trained and medicine errors were investigated.
“Medication Administration Records had been fully completed and where handwritten amendments had been made these changes had been checked and counter signed.” from the report
Kind care
People spoke positively about staff, and inspectors saw compassionate interactions. Staff supported people at a relaxed pace and encouraged independence.
“People consistently spoke positively of the staff team and we witnessed numerous compassionate and kind interactions.” from the report
Management checks
The home carried out regular audits and acted when improvements were needed. Staff said managers were approachable and supportive.
“Governance systems were effective. Audits had been completed regularly and action taken, were necessary to improve systems and the service's performance.” from the report
Toilet privacy
needs fixingA toilet next to the lounge did not have a lock. Inspectors said this created a risk to people's dignity when using it independently, and recommended seeking expert guidance.
“One toilet, adjacent to the lounge was not fitted with a lock.” from the report
Building maintenance
minorSome carpets and paintwork needed updating, and the landing near the lift was narrow. The provider had identified some work and agreed to review the risks around the lift.
“Carpets in some communal areas required updating.” from the report
Recent food problems
minorPeople said food quality had gone downhill for a while during staffing changes, although they also said it had improved and inspectors found meals were appropriate.
“The food has got better recently, it went downhill for a while” from the report
Capacity assessments
minorThe provider said it intended to review capacity assessment processes so that assessments were specific to each decision. This was discussed with inspectors rather than recorded as a breach.
“The provider intended to review capacity assessments processes to ensure they were decision specific.” from the report
- 01Has the toilet next to the lounge now been fitted with a lock or otherwise made private?
- 02What action has been taken following the recommendation about people's dignity when using the toilet independently?
- 03Have the recent staffing problems been resolved, and how many care staff are usually available on each shift?
- 04Have the carpets, damaged paintwork and narrow lift landing been reviewed or improved?
- 05How are decision-specific capacity assessments carried out and reviewed?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected, and their previous ratings were used in calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 November 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.
What inspectors found, May 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with minor issues about cream records and hot water resolved or being addressed.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 25 April 2018. The home could care for up to 31 adults and 29 people were living there. Inspectors spoke with people, a relative, staff and a visiting healthcare professional. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicines, staff records and other documents.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, personalised care plans, safe medicines arrangements, good support with health needs and a warm atmosphere. People were treated with kindness, involved in decisions and offered activities and choices about daily life.
There were two issues to note. Some cream application records had gaps. Some sinks had no hot water, while others were too hot on the inspection day after boiler work. People were alerted, and the registered manager later told CQC the boiler had been repaired. The previous inspection was also rated Good, and this rating stayed the same.
Kind relationships
People had good relationships with staff and each other. Inspectors saw staff providing respectful, caring and compassionate support.
“Staff interacted with people in a respectful, caring and compassionate manner.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough suitably qualified staff, with extra staff available if people's needs increased. Call bells were answered quickly.
“Throughout the inspection we saw people received care and support in a timely manner and call bells were quickly answered.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's individual needs, wishes and preferred routines. Staff received updated information at the start of each shift.
“Care plans were personalised to the individual and gave clear details about each person's specific needs and how they liked to be supported.” from the report
Positive atmosphere
The home had a friendly and relaxed atmosphere. People could choose how to spend their time and take part in activities such as knitting, bingo and community visits.
“During our inspection visit there was a friendly and relaxed atmosphere at the service.” from the report
Cream records
needs fixingThere were gaps in the records showing when staff had applied some creams. The registered manager said this would be discussed with staff and improved.
“However, we found there were some gaps in the recording of when staff had applied creams.” from the report
Hot water
needs fixingOn the inspection day, some sinks had no hot water and others had water that was too hot. People were alerted, and the boiler was later reported as repaired.
“However, on the day of the inspection some sinks had no hot water and others had water that was too hot.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that staff record every application of creams?
- 02What checks are carried out to make sure hot water is safe at every sink?
- 03How will you assess and review my relative's care plan and preferred routines?
- 04How will you support my relative to choose activities, visitors and where they spend their time?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five rating areas, with care, accommodation, records, staffing, medicines and management systems examined. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 May 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 Godolphin House Care Home
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 January 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
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.