CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Jubilee Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, August 2021
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, personalised care but staffing, training and oversight were not consistently strong.
This was the home's first inspection since it registered. Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 5 July 2021, spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
People were treated kindly and with respect. Care plans were personalised, staff knew people well, activities reflected people's interests, and relatives were generally positive about the care and management.
The home was not always safe, effective or well-led. There were staffing shortages, a laundry and deep-cleaning backlog, gaps in fire training, incomplete medicines guidance and quality checks that had missed problems. The overall rating was Requires Improvement, while Caring and Responsive were rated Good.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people kindly and providing person-centred support. People and relatives spoke positively about the care.
“We observed staff interacting with people and found they were kind, caring and delivered support in a person-centred way.” from the report
Personalised care plans
Care plans gave staff useful information about people's needs and preferences. Staff knew people well and helped them keep their independence.
“Care plan documentation we reviewed was informative and gave the reader a good understand of the person's needs and preferences.” from the report
People's choices were supported
People were offered choices about food, drinks and activities. Activities were arranged around people's interests and preferences.
“People were supported to take part in activities that were socially and culturally relevant and appropriate to them.” from the report
Safeguarding awareness
Staff understood safeguarding and knew what to do if they suspected abuse. Risks linked to people's care had also been assessed.
“Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about safeguarding and knew what action to take if they suspected abuse.” from the report
Not always enough staff
seriousInspectors found that staffing levels did not always meet people's needs. Low domestic staffing also affected care workers and laundry work.
“Through our observations and speaking with people and their relatives, we found there were not always enough staff available to meet people's needs.” from the report
Cleaning and laundry risk
seriousDomestic hours were not enough to maintain deep cleaning. Laundry was building up, creating a potential infection control risk, although action was taken after the inspection.
“This was also impacting on the laundry, which was building up and creating a potential infection control risk.” from the report
Training gaps
needs fixingStaff appeared able to carry out their roles, but training records showed a significant gap in fire evacuation training. A plan was in place to complete it.
“Staff training records indicated that only 24 percent of staff had received training in fire evacuation.” from the report
Weak quality checks
needs fixingAudits did not always identify problems found by inspectors. Some management records, including the training record, were not accurate or up to date.
“However, these had not identified some of the issues we found during our inspection.” from the report
- 01What is the current staffing level on each unit, including domestic and laundry staff, and how do you check it meets residents' needs?
- 02Has the laundry process been fully reorganised, and how do you prevent dirty and clean laundry from being mixed?
- 03Has all required fire evacuation training been completed, and how are staff competencies checked?
- 04Have the 'as and when required' medicines protocols been rewritten with enough detail for staff to use safely?
- 05How do your current audits identify and correct problems that earlier checks missed?
This was the first, planned and unannounced inspection of a newly registered home; inspectors assessed all five key questions and infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 August 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.
Every inspection of Jubilee Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- August 2021Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 November 2019.
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
97 live-in carers within about an hour of Rotherham
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. 80 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
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.