CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ivy Cottage
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, staff were safely recruited, staffing levels were sufficient and infection control measures were effective. Medicines were managed safely overall, but some records needed correcting.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care plans were updated. Staff had relevant training, people were supported with food and healthcare, and staff followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- The report does not give a separate rating for Caring. Inspectors described care as person-centred and said staff promoted dignity, privacy, choice and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- The report does not give a separate rating for Responsive. Inspectors found that support plans reflected people's needs, communication preferences and personal goals.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider had audits, feedback systems and an open culture. Managers understood their responsibilities and worked alongside staff to maintain standards.
What inspectors found, November 2022
Ivy Cottage is rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care, with a minor medicines-recording issue corrected during the inspection.
The inspection took place in October 2022. Inspectors reviewed care plans, medicines, staffing, recruitment, infection control and management records. They spoke with people using the service, relatives, staff and an advocate.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were rated Good. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe recruitment, well-managed medicines, good infection control and support that promoted choice, independence and dignity.
Some medicines records were not fully complete. Allergies were not always recorded in the right part of care plans, and one person's instructions for medicines taken when needed were not linked together. The manager corrected this straight away. The previous overall rating was Requires Improvement in 2019, so the overall rating had improved to Good.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make decisions, choose activities and meals, personalise their rooms and take part in recruitment.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests.” from the report
Skilled and sufficient staff
There were enough staff to meet people's assessed needs. Recruitment checks, induction and training were in place before staff worked alone.
“There were enough staff employed to meet people's assessed needs.” from the report
Person-centred support
Care plans reflected people's health, communication and personal needs. Staff supported people to pursue their interests and goals.
“People's care and support plans reflected their range of needs and this promoted their wellbeing and enjoyment of life.” from the report
Open management
The provider used audits, feedback and partnership working to monitor care and improve outcomes.
“The provider had effective systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of the support provided, including regular audits.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you now check that every person's allergy information is recorded correctly in their care plan?
- 02How were the instructions for medicines taken when needed linked and checked after the inspection?
- 03Who is currently responsible for managing the home while recruitment of a new registered manager is completed?
- 04What actions were taken after the previous Requires Improvement rating in 2019?
- 05How are people and their relatives involved in reviewing care plans, activities and personal goals?
This was a focused inspection prompted by a review of information, with particular attention to infection prevention and control under Safe; the report gives ratings for Safe, Effective and Well-led but not separate ratings for Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 November 2022 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 2020
Ivy Cottage was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection prevention and control practices during a targeted Covid-19 inspection.
Inspectors visited the home on 19 August 2020. The visit was announced and focused only on infection prevention and control measures during the coronavirus pandemic.
They found the home visibly clean, tidy and free from unpleasant smells. Staff were wearing the correct protective equipment and understood how to use it. Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements for visitors, social distancing, shielding, testing and managing outbreaks.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or a rated score for safe care.
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home visibly clean, tidy and free from unpleasant smells.
“During our inspection, we found Ivy Cottage to be visibly clean. The environment was tidy and odour free.” from the report
Correct protective equipment
Staff were wearing the correct protective equipment and understood what they needed to use.
“During our inspection, we found that staff were wearing the correct Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).” from the report
Keeping people in touch
Staff helped people maintain contact with relatives and friends through telephone calls and letters.
“Throughout the pandemic, staff at the home supported people to keep in contact with their relatives and friends.” from the report
Regular infection control checks
The home had completed regular internal checks on infection prevention and control.
“We were reassured that the home had completed regular internal IPC audits.” from the report
Additional Covid support
A Covid lead supported the manager and staff with managing Covid and working towards best practice.
“The home were in receipt of support from a Covid Lead from Ivy Care.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control checks are carried out now, and what did the most recent audit find?
- 02What are the current arrangements for visits, shielding and social distancing?
- 03How do you access Covid testing for residents and staff who have symptoms?
- 04How will you support my relative to keep in contact with family and friends if visits are restricted?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide ratings or findings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 September 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.
Every inspection of Ivy Cottage
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- August 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 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
92 live-in carers within about an hour of Wakefield
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 £980 to £1,260 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
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.