CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Islands’ View
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines, risk assessments, fire safety and infection control were managed safely, although inspectors recommended reviewing staffing arrangements throughout the year.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- Staff were trained and people’s health, nutrition and care needs were supported well. The environment was worn, cluttered and not properly maintained, with a broken downstairs toilet and limited space.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff spent time talking with people, understood their preferences and involved them in decisions about their care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and reflected people’s needs, routines and preferences. People were supported to maintain relationships, take part in activities and receive end of life care.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The manager was visible and staff felt supported, but there were gaps in audits and no clear plans at the time of inspection to deal with the expected staffing crisis. The provider had also failed to seek and act on feedback about the environment.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Islands’ View was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, responsive care, but the building, staffing plans and management systems needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 21 and 22 November 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, staff, relatives and professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicines records and management records for both the care home and the home care service.
People were generally safe, treated kindly and supported according to their needs. Medicines were managed safely, care records were detailed, and staff helped people access healthcare. However, the building was worn, cluttered and not always suitable for people’s needs. Staffing depended heavily on agency workers and extra hours from existing staff.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe, Caring and Responsive were rated Good. Effective and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. The previous overall rating was Good, published on 2 October 2018.
Kind and respectful care
People appeared relaxed and comfortable with staff. Staff spent time chatting, offered reassurance and respected people’s privacy and choices.
“People looked relaxed, happy and comfortable with staff supporting them.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were ordered, stored, given and disposed of safely in the care home. Staff also checked medicine-taking during home care visits.
“People received their medicines in a safe way, as prescribed for them.” from the report
Personalised care records
Care plans recorded people’s histories, preferences, communication needs and health needs. Staff used this information to provide individual support.
“Care plans for everyone receiving a service were person centred and detailed people's likes and dislikes and how best to deliver care and support.” from the report
Good links with health services
Staff recognised changes in people’s health and made appropriate referrals. They worked with GPs, district nurses and other professionals.
“People were supported to access healthcare services, staff recognised changes in people's health, and sought professional advice appropriately.” from the report
Poor condition of the building
seriousSome carpets, flooring, furniture and bathrooms were in poor condition. Areas were cluttered, a lounge was being used for laundry, and the downstairs toilet had not worked for several months.
“The provider had failed to ensure the premises used by people is properly maintained.” from the report
Staffing pressure
needs fixingThe home relied heavily on agency workers and staff working extra hours. Inspectors were concerned that recruitment and housing problems could affect continuity and standards, especially in summer.
“Staff working above and beyond to allow us to maintain staffing and keep safe, but not sustainable and we are one incident away from not being able to do so.” from the report
Management checks and feedback
seriousSome room, equipment and environment checks had not been completed. The provider had not properly sought and acted on feedback about the environment.
“Not all regular audits took place, for example weekly room checks, sling (safety) checks and weekly checks of wheelchairs, hoist and door alarms.” from the report
- 01What repairs and improvements to the building have been completed since the inspection, including the downstairs toilet, flooring and bathrooms?
- 02How will you maintain enough permanent staff and reduce reliance on agency workers, particularly during the summer?
- 03Are weekly room, sling, wheelchair, hoist, door alarm and environment checks now completed and reviewed?
- 04How do you collect and act on feedback from residents, relatives and staff about the building and care?
- 05How will you keep families informed when a person’s needs change or when there are staffing pressures?
This inspection covered the care home’s premises and care, and personal care and support delivered in people’s own homes, but not the premises of those home care visits. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 February 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.
What inspectors found, October 2018
Islands’ View is rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with some gaps in staff training and building security.
Inspectors visited without warning from 3 to 5 September 2018. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and outside professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was caring, clean and well run. People felt safe and said staff were kind and respectful. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk assessments, well-managed medicines and good links with health professionals. People receiving support in their own homes also said visits were reliable and provided by staff they knew.
The home kept its Good rating from the previous inspection in October 2016. The five areas inspected were all rated Good. This means inspectors found the service met the expected standard overall, although they identified some areas for improvement.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives consistently described staff as caring. Inspectors saw staff spending time with people, listening to them and protecting their privacy.
“People and their relatives said people were treated with kindness, respect and compassion.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored securely and records showed they were given at the correct times. Staff who administered medicines had suitable training.
“The medicines' system was well managed, medicines were stored securely, and comprehensive records were kept regarding receipt, administration, and disposal of medicines.” from the report
Reliable home support
People receiving support in their own homes said staff usually arrived on time, stayed for the agreed period and did not miss visits.
“Staff arrived on time, stayed to assist them the correct amount of time, and did not leave out any assistance which they were required to give.” from the report
Good management oversight
Managers used audits, monitoring visits and action plans to check the service. Staff and outside professionals described the management team as supportive.
“There was also a system of audits to ensure quality in all areas of the service was checked, maintained, and where necessary improved.” from the report
Building security
seriousPeople from neighbouring flats or the wider community could enter the building and reach the care area without restriction. Inspectors said this created a risk of intruders, although no incidents had occurred.
“Visitors to the flats, (or people from the wider community) could enter the building, and also go within the care home without any restriction.” from the report
Care records were hard to follow
needs fixingSome care files contained several documents labelled as care plans, making it difficult to identify the current version. Some management records were also disorganised.
“This made it difficult to ascertain what was the definitive, current document.” from the report
Activities being reviewed
minorSome activities were provided, but some people were unsure whether regular activities were available. The service planned to provide a wider range of activities.
“Activities provision was however currently being reviewed so a wider variety of opportunities could be provided.” from the report
Minor medicines recording issue
minorA small number of creams and lotions had not been dated when opened. The manager said staff would be reminded to do this.
“Although a minor number of items were not dated when opened.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to stop unauthorised visitors entering the care area?
- 02Have all staff now completed the training required by law, and how do you track outstanding training?
- 03How do you make sure staff can quickly find the latest care plan and important information?
- 04What regular activities are now available for people who live here?
- 05Has the manager's application to register with the CQC been completed?
This was an unannounced inspection of the care home and community support service, covering all five CQC questions; the home retained its previous Good rating from October 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 October 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 Islands’ View
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- February 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 December 2010.
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
At least 6 live-in carers within about three hours of Isles of Scilly
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.
4 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“He had been a little anxious before she arrived, but has since stated that he would be very happy for her to care for him again”
“Grace has a very mature and positive approach to care and caring for vulnerable people and brought a ray of sunshine to what was a dark period in our life.”
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.