CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Harvey House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk management, safe medicines practices and effective infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers used audits and a clear management structure to monitor care and make improvements. People, relatives and staff were listened to, and the rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and strong management, while some parts of the building still needed repair and redecoration.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 25 October 2023. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience spoke with 8 people, 6 care staff and 11 relatives. They also checked care records, medicines records, recruitment records and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe was rated Good and well-led was rated Good. People said they felt safe and were happy with their care. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practices, suitable risk assessments and good infection control.
The home had a friendly and calm atmosphere. Staff supported activities, responded promptly and involved people in decisions. The building was being improved, but some toilets, a bedroom and other areas still needed attention because of damaged fittings, fixtures and paintwork.
This inspection only assessed Safe and well-led. The ratings for the other questions were carried forward from the previous inspection when calculating the overall rating. The well-led rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection to Good.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe. Staff understood how to report concerns and followed care plans and risk assessments.
“People were safeguarded from abuse and avoidable harm.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Call bells were answered promptly, including at weekends.
“There were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs. Call bells were answered promptly.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored and given safely. Staff also involved people in their medicines where possible and avoided unnecessary medicines for distressed behaviour.
“People were supported to receive their medicines safely.” from the report
Positive leadership
People, relatives and staff described an open, friendly culture. Managers listened to feedback and used audits and incidents to improve the service.
“There was a positive and open culture at the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Which toilets, bedrooms and other areas still need repair or redecoration, and when will the work be finished?
- 02How are falls and busy periods being used to decide staffing levels and staff deployment?
- 03How will you involve my relative in decisions about their care and activities?
- 04How will you check that medicines remain safe and that my relative is involved as much as possible?
- 05What improvements have been made since the previous inspection, and what work is still outstanding?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and well-led only; the other ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection when calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 December 2023 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, October 2022
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe care, but the home still needs to improve how it completes planned improvements.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 6 September 2022. Inspectors checked Safe and Well-led, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, well-managed risks, safe medicines practice and suitable infection control. People said they felt safe, and staff knew how to respond to abuse and avoidable harm.
Well-led remained Requires Improvement. The provider had quality checks and had identified some environmental work, but improvements were not always given clear completion dates or completed promptly. The home was no longer in breach of regulations.
The overall rating changed from Requires Improvement to Good. Ratings for the questions not inspected were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding procedures and knew how to report concerns.
“People who used the service and their relatives told us people felt safe.” from the report
Risks were managed
Care records contained personalised risk information and were reviewed regularly. Falls were analysed and care plans were updated when needed.
“Risks to people's health and wellbeing were managed safely and effectively.” from the report
Enough trained staff
Inspectors found enough staff on day and night shifts. Training was up to date and recruitment checks were completed.
“There were enough staff deployed to support people effectively and safely.” from the report
Medicines were safe
Medicine records were completed accurately, medicines were stored appropriately and staff were checked as competent.
“Medicines were managed safely.” from the report
Person-centred support
Care plans included people's needs, preferences and life history. Staff knew people well and provided personalised support.
“Information within care plans was person-centred and included relevant information around people's needs, their likes and dislikes, their life history and family relationships.” from the report
Improvements were not completed promptly
needs fixingThe provider had identified environmental improvements, but there was no scheduled completion date for some approved work. This meant action plans did not always lead to timely improvements.
“The issues had been identified by the registered manager during various audits but had not always been addressed by the provider in a timely manner.” from the report
Action plans lacked deadlines
needs fixingSome development actions did not have clear timescales. Inspectors said this meant opportunities to improve the service were missed.
“Action plans were developed, however there were not always clearly set timescales of each issue.” from the report
Feedback was not always collected
minorRelatives were involved in care plan reviews, but not all relatives had received the provider's survey about the quality of care.
“However, not all relatives we spoke with had received the survey.” from the report
- 01Which environmental improvements identified in the report have now been completed?
- 02How do you set and monitor deadlines for actions in the development plan?
- 03How will you make sure relatives are consistently asked for feedback about the quality of care?
- 04How are falls and other incidents reviewed, and how are resulting changes shared with staff?
- 05How do you check that staffing levels continue to match people's needs on both day and night shifts?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 October 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 Harvey House
5 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2022Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2021Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 September 2012.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leicestershire
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. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“Together Earther and I supported her to die at home with great dignity and compassion and him to continue with life.”
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.