CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Inglenook House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe recruitment checks, risk assessments and trained staff administering medicines. Staff knew how to respond to suspected abuse.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training and knew people's needs and communication methods. People were supported with nutrition, hydration, healthcare, consent and legally required decisions.
- Caring?
- Good
- People appeared relaxed and comfortable. Staff were patient and kind, respected privacy and dignity, and supported independence and involvement in care decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records were personalised and included people's wishes, preferences and communication needs. The complaints procedure was not in an accessible format, and end-of-life wishes were not yet documented.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider's values were reflected in staff practice, and quality checks were used to identify improvements. There was no registered manager, although a recently appointed manager was applying to the Commission.
What inspectors found, April 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with end-of-life wishes and accessible complaints information still to improve.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection. One inspector visited on 24 March 2018, met all seven people living in the home, observed their care and spoke with staff and relatives. Records, medicines, care plans, the building and quality checks were also reviewed.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines practices, trained staff, personalised care and kind relationships. People were supported to make choices and communicate in ways that suited them.
There were some areas still being worked on. End-of-life wishes had not yet been recorded, the complaints procedure was not in an accessible format for people living there, and there was no registered manager at the time. The home remained Good overall, the same rating as at the inspection in December 2015.
Kind relationships
Staff knew people well and treated them with patience, kindness and compassion. Inspectors saw laughter, smiles and emotional support when someone was distressed.
“We heard and saw plenty of laughter and smiles.” from the report
Personalised communication
Staff understood people's verbal and non-verbal communication. Visual choices, communication guidance and hospital passports helped people express preferences and receive suitable support.
“People's communication needs were effectively assessed and met by staff.” from the report
Safe care
Risks were assessed and reviewed, staffing levels were suitable, and medicines were administered by trained staff with records and checks in place.
“People received their medicines safely from staff who had completed training.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were encouraged to make day-to-day choices and take part in household tasks where they could. Staff supported people at their own pace.
“Staff did not rush people and support was given at the person's own pace.” from the report
End-of-life wishes
needs fixingPeople's end-of-life wishes had not yet been recorded. The manager planned to discuss this with relatives, advocates and people as far as possible.
“People's end of life wishes were not currently documented, however the manager had plans to discuss this issue with relatives, advocates and involve people as much as possible.” from the report
Accessible complaints information
minorA complaints procedure was available, but people living in the home would not fully understand it. The provider said the policy would be reviewed.
“A complaints procedure was available; however people currently living in the service would not fully understand the procedure.” from the report
Registered manager
minorThe home did not have a registered manager during the inspection. A recently appointed manager was in the process of submitting an application.
“The service did not have a registered manager; however the recently appointed manager was in the process of submitting their application to the Commission.” from the report
- 01Have people's end-of-life wishes now been discussed and recorded, with their relatives or advocates involved where appropriate?
- 02How can people living here make a complaint or raise a concern using information they can understand?
- 03Has the manager's application to become registered been completed?
- 04How are changes in people's non-verbal communication or behaviour recorded and acted on?
- 05How are medicines given when required, and how do you check that the records and guidance remain accurate?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with the inspector observing all seven people living in the home and reviewing care, medicines, premises and quality records. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 April 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 Inglenook House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Plymouth
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.
8 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
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.