CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Imber House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were identified and managed, medicines were administered safely, the home was clean and there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training, supervision and support. People were supported with food, drink, health appointments and decisions about their care, including through the Mental Capacity Act and legal safeguards.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and caring. People were supported to make choices, stay independent and have privacy and dignity.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised around people's routines, interests and preferences. People were supported with activities, employment, community access, family contact and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open culture and a provider who was visible in the home. Audits were used to identify and act on improvements.
What inspectors found, December 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, and said improvements since the previous inspection had been completed.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection. One inspector visited on 15 October 2018, spoke with people, relatives, staff and the provider, and reviewed care records, staff files and management records.
The home supported six people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found that people were safe, medicines were managed properly, the home was clean and there were enough trained staff.
People received care based on their preferences. Staff supported independence, privacy, health appointments, meals, activities and contact with family. Inspectors also found kind relationships and an open approach to feedback and complaints.
All five areas were rated Good. The provider had taken over in 2017, when the service was rated Requires Improvement, and inspectors found that identified improvements had been completed.
Personalised support
Care records included people's routines, preferences and life histories. Staff used this information to provide individual care.
“People were provided with personalised care based on their individual preferences.” from the report
Independence and dignity
People were supported to make choices, carry out tasks they could manage and have privacy in their own rooms and personal care.
“The service promoted people's independence, upholding their dignity and right to privacy.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People took part in activities inside and outside the home, including pottery, work, shopping and time with family.
“People were enabled to access meaningful activity both in the service and in the community.” from the report
Improved management
After the provider took over, they identified improvements needed in the building, care planning and quality checks. Inspectors found these actions had been completed.
“There was a robust quality assurance system now in place, with a range of audits being carried out to assess the quality of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How often are my relative's care plans and risk assessments reviewed, and how are changes in their needs recorded?
- 02How would you make sure there are enough staff if several people need support to go out or attend activities at the same time?
- 03Which activities, work opportunities or community visits could be offered to my relative based on their interests?
- 04How do you check that medicines continue to be given correctly, and what happens if an audit finds a problem?
- 05How would you support my relative to make everyday decisions and protect their rights if they could not make a particular decision?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 December 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 Imber House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- December 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 May 2017.
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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Suffolk
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 £1,260 a week. 17 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
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.