CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Jane House
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Jane House: CQC found safe infection prevention measures, but did not rate the service.
The CQC made an unannounced, targeted inspection on 18 November 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable infection controls. Staff had PPE and training, the home was kept clean, and extra cleaning was used for high-touch areas. Staff and residents had access to testing, and the home had plans for managing outbreaks.
The home supported people to keep in touch with families by video calls when visits were restricted. Staff also used social stories to explain coronavirus rules in an accessible way.
The service was marked 'Inspected but not rated'. This was not a full inspection of all aspects of care, so it does not give ratings for the other four questions.
Infection prevention
The home had PPE, regular cleaning, an infection control policy and audits. Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control procedures were being followed.
“We were assured that the provider was following safe infection prevention and control procedures.” from the report
Consistent staffing
Staff worked only at this home and the provider said it did not use agency staff. This reduced movement in and out of the service and supported consistency for people with communication needs.
“The home's staffing model ensured people received consistent support and minimised the movement of staff in and out of the service.” from the report
Accessible information
Staff used social stories to explain coronavirus restrictions and why they were needed in a way people could understand.
“Staff had used resources such as social stories to provide information about Covid-19 to people in an accessible way.” from the report
Family contact
When visits were not possible because of coronavirus restrictions, staff helped people keep in touch with families through video calls.
“Staff had supported people to maintain contact with their families through platforms such as FaceTime and WhatsApp video calls.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now, including PPE, testing and cleaning?
- 02How would you support my relative if they needed to self-isolate?
- 03How would my relative keep in contact with family if visits were restricted?
- 04How do you explain changes to coronavirus or other safety rules to people who have communication needs?
- 05What are the latest CQC ratings for the areas that this inspection did not assess?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 December 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.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Jane House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with end-of-life wishes being added to care records.
The inspection took place on 4 December 2019 and was announced 24 hours beforehand. One inspector reviewed care records, medicines records, recruitment files and quality checks. They observed care and spoke with staff, the manager, one relative and health and social care professionals.
The home supports up to eight adults with autism and learning disabilities. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines management, suitable risk assessments and clean surroundings. People were supported with healthcare, food, communication, activities and maintaining independence.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The overall rating remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection published in April 2017.
Safe medicines
Medicines records were complete, medicines were stored securely and staff had been trained and assessed as competent.
“MAR records had been completed in full and there were no gaps in recording.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff had training relevant to people's needs, including autism, behaviour support, medicines and safeguarding. Records showed regular supervision and appraisals.
“Training records confirmed that staff had completed training that was relevant to people's needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans covered people's needs, communication, preferences and behaviour support. Staff could explain how each person liked to be supported.
“Staff had a very good understanding of people's needs.” from the report
Activities and independence
People took part in household tasks, local activities, holidays, horse riding and other interests. Support focused on helping people live active lives.
“People had individual weekly day care programmes.” from the report
Respectful care
Staff were observed knocking before entering rooms, explaining personal care and supporting people to make choices.
“We observed staff knocking on people's doors before entering their rooms and speaking with them in a respectful and engaging manner.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The manager carried out regular audits and spot checks. The report says actions were taken when checks found shortfalls.
“The audits were up to date and showed actions were taken when shortfalls were identified.” from the report
End-of-life wishes
minorAt the time of the inspection, care records did not contain enough detail about people's individual end-of-life wishes. The manager added a new section during the inspection and began discussing this with families.
“Although people's care records referred to their cultural and religious backgrounds there was no detail about their individual wishes at the end of their lives.” from the report
- 01How are my relative's end-of-life wishes recorded now, and when will they be reviewed?
- 02How would staffing be increased if my relative needed extra support for a healthcare appointment or social activity?
- 03How will you communicate care choices, complaints information and changes in care to my relative?
- 04How will I be involved in care plan reviews and decisions about my relative's support?
- 05Which activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative, and how would you support their independence?
This was an announced inspection of all five CQC areas, and it looked at both the care provided and the care home premises; the previous Good ratings were retained. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 December 2019 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 Jane House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.