CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Jonathan House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks, fire safety, infection control and medicines were managed through checks and written guidance.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care plans were kept up to date. Staff had training and supervision, and people were supported with healthcare, food and daily decisions.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They were involved in everyday decisions and supported to be independent.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Support was highly personal and flexible. People could communicate in ways that suited them, follow their interests, maintain relationships and take part in community activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home was organised and well run. Managers used audits, feedback and incidents to monitor quality and plan improvements.
What inspectors found, March 2020
Jonathan House is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and highly personalised care, with responsiveness rated Outstanding.
This was an unannounced inspection on 6 February 2020. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, staff, the manager, relatives and visiting professionals. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff files and records about safety and quality.
The home was clean and safe. People were protected from abuse, risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely and staff were trained. Care plans were personal and regularly updated. People received support with healthcare, food, communication and daily choices.
The strongest area was responsiveness, rated Outstanding. People had a say in their care, chose keyworkers, followed their interests and took part in activities in the home and community. The home was rated Good overall, with Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led also rated Good.
Personal choice and control
People were closely involved in their care and could choose how they communicated, who supported them and what goals they worked towards.
“People received exceptionally responsive support which was tailored to meet their individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Community life
People were supported to take part in activities, volunteering, church life and events. These helped people build confidence, skills and relationships.
“People were supported to follow their interests and take part in a wide range of meaningful activities within the service and the community.” from the report
Clean and safer environment
Building work had addressed the safety and infection control problems found at the previous inspection. Inspectors found the home clean and well maintained.
“At this inspection we found the service had met these requirements.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People, relatives and professionals gave positive feedback about staff. Staff knew people well and respected their privacy, dignity and independence.
“People were supported by caring and compassionate staff who treated them with dignity and respect.” from the report
Learning and improvement
The management team used audits, feedback and incidents to identify improvements. People and relatives were regularly asked for their views.
“There was a very strong emphasis on improving care and learning at Jonathan House.” from the report
Staff vacancy
minorThere was one staff vacancy when inspectors visited. The gap was covered by regular bank staff rather than agency staff, but families should check whether this remains the case.
“The service had one staff vacancy at the time of our inspection.” from the report
- 01Is the staff vacancy now filled, and who would cover shifts if there are gaps?
- 02How would you support my relative to follow their own interests and take part in community activities?
- 03How would my relative communicate feedback, make a complaint or ask for changes if they use alternative communication methods?
- 04How are care plans and risk assessments reviewed when a person's needs or wishes change?
- 05How would you support my relative to access healthcare and share their needs with professionals?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions; the previous overall rating was Good, published on 14 August 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 March 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, August 2017
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but the kitchen and laundry layout created an infection-control risk.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection over two days. The inspector spoke with people living at the home, staff, relatives and a health professional. They also checked care plans, medicines, recruitment, training, incidents and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were all rated Good. Staff were kind, people were involved in decisions, and care plans reflected individual needs. People were supported with health appointments, daily activities, work and independence.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. The kitchen, laundry room and downstairs bathroom were connected in a way that meant people and staff walked through food preparation areas with dirty laundry. Cleaning equipment had also been left outside. The provider had identified the layout problem and took immediate action to move the cleaning equipment.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that staff treated people with kindness and respect. People's privacy and choices were respected.
“Staff were kind and caring. Staff respected people's privacy and gave people choice and control about their care and support.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans gave staff guidance about individual needs. People helped shape their care and were supported to remain independent.
“People had detailed care plans that provided staff with guidance on each person's individual needs.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were securely stored, administered safely and checked regularly. People were supported to manage their own medicines where appropriate.
“People received their medicines safely and when required. Staff had received appropriate training and received competency checks.” from the report
Support with health and independence
People attended health appointments and annual checks. They were also supported with work, cooking, shopping, holidays and other daily activities.
“People were encouraged and supported to making decisions about their daily care and support.” from the report
Kitchen and laundry layout
seriousThe connected rooms meant people and staff walked through the kitchen and food preparation area to reach the laundry and bathroom. This created a risk of cross infection.
“The environment and configuration of the kitchen and laundry room was not adequate to prevent the risk of cross infection.” from the report
Cleaning equipment storage
minorMops and buckets were found outside, where they could be exposed to dirt and contamination. The manager moved them to indoor storage during the inspection.
“We found during the inspection mobs and buckets left outside. This meant they could be exposed to contamination and dirt.” from the report
Staff appraisals
needs fixingTwo staff files did not contain an appraisal. The provider's quality checks had identified this and the new manager was arranging appraisals.
“Two staff files we checked had no appraisal. The provider's quality assurance process had identified this shortfall.” from the report
- 01Has the work to separate the kitchen, laundry room and downstairs bathroom been completed?
- 02How do you now prevent dirty laundry from passing through the kitchen or food preparation areas?
- 03Where are mops and buckets stored, and how is this checked?
- 04Have all staff received the appraisals that were missing at the inspection?
- 05Has the manager's application to become registered been approved?
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 August 2017 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 Jonathan House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2014GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Bristol, City of
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 £1,020 to £1,300 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She became a good friend to my mother in law, chatting with her, dancing with her, knitting with her and the list goes on”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.