CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Huish House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were safe, risks were assessed, medicines were administered safely and the building was maintained. Staffing numbers were described as adequate for safety, but staffing remained an ongoing concern for relatives.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and staff were trained in people's individual needs. People received suitable food, healthcare and support with communication and decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed treating people warmly and respectfully. People were involved in care planning and supported to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support was tailored to people's routines, communication methods, interests and changing needs. People took part in college, social activities, trips and community life, although two people needed increased staffing.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The new manager was supported by the provider and had an improvement plan. Audits and feedback were used to monitor quality, although there were vacancies in the management team and some staff were acting up in senior roles.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with staffing levels and management changes needing close attention.
This was an unannounced inspection on 25 and 27 November 2019. One inspector observed care, spoke with staff and managers, reviewed care and medicines records, and contacted relatives.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. People were supported to make choices, build independence, communicate in their own way and take part in activities at home and in the community.
The home was going through a management change after the previous manager left. Relatives and staff were concerned about staffing levels, particularly for two people whose needs had changed. The manager was seeking additional care hours and working with health and care professionals.
The Good rating means inspectors found consistently good outcomes and suitable systems, but it does not mean there were no concerns. The previous overall rating was also Good, published in April 2017.
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, interests, routines and important relationships. Staff used different ways of communicating so people could express choices even when they could not speak.
“Care plans were very detailed and explained clearly what care and support each person needed and how this was to be provided.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff chatting, laughing and joking with people in a warm and friendly way. Privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
“During the inspection we saw staff chatting, laughing and joking with people and assisting them in a way that was equal, friendly and warm.” from the report
Activities and community life
People took part in a broad range of activities suited to their interests, including college, singing, art, cinema and trips. They also kept in touch with family and used local community facilities.
“Records showed that people went to college, singing group, café trips, lunches out, art club and the cinema.” from the report
Good monitoring and improvement
The provider carried out checks on care, safety and the environment. The manager had a 12-month improvement plan and was working with others to develop the home.
“People lived in a home where the manager had identified where improvements could be made.” from the report
Staffing levels
needs fixingRelatives and staff raised ongoing concerns about staffing. Two people needed more staff support because their needs had changed, and the manager was still trying to secure additional care hours.
“Two people needed their staffing increased to meet their changing needs.” from the report
Management vacancies
needs fixingThe previous manager had left and there were vacancies in the management team. Some staff were temporarily carrying out senior roles while recruitment continued.
“There were vacancies in the management team, with some staff 'acting up' in senior roles.” from the report
Large home
minorThe home was larger than current best practice guidance for this type of service. Inspectors said the building and its setting helped reduce the possible negative effect on people.
“It was registered for the support of up to 12 people. This is larger than current best practice guidance.” from the report
- 01What are the current staffing levels, and how are you meeting the increased support needs of the two people mentioned in the report?
- 02Has the management team now been fully recruited, and who is responsible for senior decisions when vacancies remain?
- 03What progress has been made on the manager's 12-month improvement plan?
- 04How do you help each person communicate a complaint or show that they are unhappy?
- 05How do you ensure new staff get enough training and time to understand each person's needs?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the home, the care provided and all five CQC questions; all five ratings were assessed at this inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 January 2020 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, April 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with a minor medicines storage issue identified.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 9 March 2017. One inspector observed care, spoke with staff and relatives, and checked care plans, medicines records, health and safety records, quality checks and recruitment records.
The home was calm and welcoming. Staff knew people well, treated them with kindness and respect, and supported their choices, independence, activities and family contact. People received their medicines safely and there were enough suitable staff.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. The report says action had been taken since the September 2014 inspection to improve mealtimes, which had previously felt rushed.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff treating people with warmth, patience and respect. People appeared relaxed and comfortable with the staff supporting them.
“The atmosphere in the home was happy, relaxed and welcoming.” from the report
Personalised support
Care was shaped around people's routines, preferences and ways of communicating. Staff took time to understand what people wanted.
“People received care that was responsive to their needs and personalised to their wishes and preferences.” from the report
Good staffing and training
There were enough staff to meet people's needs without rushing. Staff received induction, ongoing training and support relevant to the people living there.
“People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to meet their needs in a relaxed and unhurried manner.” from the report
Activities and family contact
People took part in activities at home and in the community. Staff also supported regular contact with families and important people.
“People were supported to follow their interests and take part in social activities.” from the report
Quality checks
The home used audits, monthly visits, peer reviews and satisfaction surveys to monitor care and identify improvements.
“There were quality assurance systems in place to monitor care and plan on going improvements.” from the report
Transporting medicines
needs fixingStaff were using a medicine pot to carry medicines from the office to other parts of the home. The manager agreed to obtain suitable secure storage for this.
“The registered manager agreed to source suitable secure storage for the transportation of medicines within the home.” from the report
- 01What secure system is now used to transport medicines within the home?
- 02How will staff support my relative to communicate choices, particularly if they use signs, cards or other non-verbal methods?
- 03How will you make sure mealtimes remain unhurried and suited to each person's needs?
- 04What activities and community trips would be suitable for my relative, and how often could they take part?
- 05How will my family be involved in reviewing the care plan and raising concerns?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC questions; the report also checked progress since the September 2014 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 April 2017 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 Huish House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 June 2014.
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
76 live-in carers within about two hours of Somerset
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 £1,020 to £1,370 a week. 62 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
“She was not phased by anything, she was adaptable, kind & gave us complete confidence to go away & not worry about a thing!”
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.