CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at IOTA Care
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about most infection-control arrangements, including PPE, testing, cleaning and visitor checks. They were only somewhat assured about shielding and social distancing because individual health-risk information had not been formally recorded at the time.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2021
IOTA Care was inspected but not rated; infection-control arrangements were largely in place, but some individual risk assessments were not formally recorded.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 15 February 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than reviewing all areas of care.
Inspectors found systems to reduce infection risks. These included visitor screening, PPE, staff testing, extra cleaning, infection-control audits and support for people to keep in touch with relatives by video calls and social media.
The registered manager knew people and staff well, but information about individual health risks had not been formally recorded. After the inspection, the manager said individual risk assessments were being completed.
The service was inspected but not rated. The Safe question was also inspected but not rated. The report does not give ratings for the other four questions.
Infection-control systems
The home had systems to manage infection risks, including enhanced cleaning and regular infection-control audits.
“Systems were in place to help manage the risks and prevent the spread of COVID-19.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors were screened before entering, including through testing, temperature checks, handwashing and a health declaration.
“Visitors were asked to consent to a rapid COVID-19 test, have their temperature checked, wash their hands and complete a health declaration before they would be allowed to enter the building.” from the report
PPE and staff testing
Staff had extra infection-control training, enough PPE was available, and staff testing and self-isolation followed national guidance.
“There were sufficient stocks of PPE available and staff were seen to be wearing PPE appropriately.” from the report
Keeping in touch
Staff supported people to maintain contact with relatives when visits were restricted.
“Staff were supporting people to maintain contact with their relatives through use of social media groups and video calls.” from the report
Risk information was not recorded
needs fixingThe manager knew people and staff well, but individual information about higher health risks had not been formally recorded during the inspection. The manager later confirmed that individual risk assessments were being completed.
“Whilst it was clear the registered manager knew people and staff very well; this information had not been formally recorded.” from the report
- 01Have individual risk assessments now been completed for every person, and how often are they reviewed?
- 02How do you assess and manage risks for people and staff with particular health needs?
- 03What are your current arrangements for visitor testing, PPE, social distancing and hand hygiene?
- 04How do you carry out staff testing, and what happens if a staff member tests positive?
- 05How will my relative keep in touch with family if visits are restricted?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control within Safe; the other four areas were not covered and the service was not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 March 2021 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, September 2018
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found highly personalised care, strong leadership and major progress in people's independence.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection. The report says the visit took place on 23 June 2018, although a later section says it was undertaken on 24 June 2018. Inspectors met both people living at the home, observed care and daily routines, and reviewed care records, staff files, training and management records. They also spoke with relatives, staff and health professionals.
The home supported up to three people with learning disabilities, autism and complex needs. Two people lived there at the time. Inspectors found that people were safe, received effective care and were treated with kindness. Staff supported people to communicate, make choices, stay healthy and take part in activities in the community.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Responsive care and leadership were rated Outstanding. Safe, Effective and Caring were rated Good. The report says the home had improved from an overall Good rating at the previous inspection in March 2016.
Personalised care
Care plans described people's communication, health needs, preferences and wishes in detail. Staff used this information to support people at their own pace.
“People had highly personalised care plans which ensured care was tailored to meet their individual and diverse needs.” from the report
Communication with families
The home developed a private online system so people, relatives, friends and staff could share pictures and messages. This helped families stay involved when they lived far away.
“This helped to ensure people had access to the information they needed in a way they could understand it” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff understood people's verbal and non-verbal communication and gave reassurance, praise and time. Inspectors saw people being treated with patience and kindness.
“We heard and saw plenty of laughter and smiles. Staff were attentive to people's needs and understood when people needed reassurance, praise or guidance.” from the report
Strong leadership
The provider and registered manager worked alongside staff and people and encouraged teamwork and improvement. Inspectors found robust systems for checking care and learning from incidents.
“The registered manager and provider had very robust and effective systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
Accessible complaints information
minorThe summary says the complaints policy was not provided in a format that people could understand. The detailed section gives a different description and calls the procedure user friendly, so families should ask to see the current accessible version.
“The policy was not provided in an accessible format for people as people currently living in the service would not understand the procedure.” from the report
- 01How would you adapt the care plan and daily routines for my relative's particular communication and sensory needs?
- 02How do you help people make choices if they cannot communicate verbally?
- 03How would my relative be supported to take part in community activities, including any extra staffing needed?
- 04How does the Scrapbook Circle system work, and how are privacy and family access managed?
- 05Can you show me the complaints information in a format my relative can understand?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the accommodation and care provided; the report says the previous overall Good rating improved to Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 September 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of IOTA Care
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2018Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 November 2015.
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.