Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Hopleys House

Goodpublished 6 April 2023, 3 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks, medicines, staffing, recruitment and infection control were managed safely.
Effective?
Good
People’s needs and choices were assessed, and staff were trained to support them. Staff worked with health and social care professionals when needed.
Caring?
Good
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported independence and involved people in decisions about their daily lives.
Responsive?
Good
Care was personalised and communication needs were met. People took part in activities, although one relative felt staff did not always encourage participation.
Well-led?
Good
The provider and staff understood their roles, and managers were described as approachable and visible. Relatives gave mixed feedback about communication, and the provider planned further feedback surveys.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, April 2023

Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, but communication with relatives was not always reliable.

This was the home’s first inspection since it registered. It was an unannounced visit on 17 February 2023 by two inspectors. They spoke with the two people living there, two relatives and five staff. They also checked care, medicine and management records.

The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with dignity, supported to make choices and helped to take part in activities and relationships.

Inspectors found staff were trained, medicines were managed safely and people’s care plans reflected their needs. The home worked with health and social care professionals. The provider had systems to check quality and make improvements.

There were some areas to keep under review. Relatives gave mixed feedback, including concerns about monthly updates and encouragement to join activities. The provider also planned to review some mental capacity and risk assessments.

What inspectors praised
  • Safe staffing and medicines

    Inspectors found enough staff and safer recruitment checks. Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely.

    “People were supported by enough staff who were safely recruited to work in the service.” from the report
  • Personalised support

    Care plans described people’s individual choices, needs and communication methods. Staff were observed supporting people in line with their preferences.

    “People received person-centred care which met their needs and preferences and their communication needs were assessed and met.” from the report
  • Respect and independence

    People were treated with dignity and supported to make choices, manage daily tasks and spend their time as they wished.

    “People's privacy and dignity was respected, and their independence promoted.” from the report
  • Health and community links

    Staff worked with health and social care professionals and supported people to take part in activities such as swimming, discos, trips and music.

    “The provider worked in partnership with others to ensure good outcomes for people receiving care.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Updates for relatives

    needs fixing

    Communication with relatives was not consistent. One relative had not received monthly reports for several months, and another had never received one.

    “One relative, however, informed us they had not received a monthly report for a few months and had raised this with the provider.” from the report
  • Capacity assessments

    minor

    The provider planned to review mental capacity assessments so they were specific to each decision.

    “The provider planned to review the assessments in place to ensure they were decision specific.” from the report
  • Risk assessment review

    minor

    The manager planned to review whether one person needed a risk assessment about hazardous substances, so staff had clear guidance.

    “The registered manager planned to review a possible risk assessment required for 1 person around Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) items.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How are monthly reports and other updates now sent to relatives, and how do you check they are received?
  2. 02How do you make sure each person is encouraged to take part in activities that interest them?
  3. 03Have the planned decision-specific mental capacity assessments now been completed?
  4. 04Has the possible risk assessment about hazardous substances been reviewed and put in place if needed?
  5. 05How are you reducing reliance on agency staff and maintaining consistency while recruiting permanent staff?

This was the first inspection since registration and covered all five CQC questions, including both the premises and the care provided; no one was receiving end of life care at the visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 April 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Hopleys House

Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.

  1. April 2023Goodcurrent rating
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Hopleys House →

  2. April 2022

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 April 2022.

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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Staffordshire

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 £1,230 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.

“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
Sarah Y., about Dawn Z.
See live-in carers near StaffordshireProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.