Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Lakenheath

Goodpublished 15 January 2022, 4 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
People were safeguarded, the environment was safe and medicines were administered and recorded safely. Staff were not consistently using COVID-19 Lateral Flow Device tests in line with government guidance, and some staff had not yet completed safeguarding training.
Effective?
Good
Staff assessed people's needs and choices, received training and worked with health professionals. People were supported with food, healthcare and decisions under the Mental Capacity Act.
Caring?
Good
People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff supported people to communicate, make decisions, take the lead and maintain their independence.
Responsive?
Good
Care plans were personalised and written with people and their families. People were supported with communication, relationships, activities and community life, and relatives said concerns were listened to.
Well-led?
Good
Inspectors found a positive, person-centred culture, regular audits and a focus on learning and improvement. Management arrangements were changing, with a new manager applying for CQC registration.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, January 2022

Lakenheath: Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some improvements still needed in COVID-19 testing and staffing consistency.

This was the first inspection since the service registered with the CQC. One inspector visited on 18 November 2021, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.

Inspectors rated the home Good in all five areas. People were treated with respect, supported to make choices and helped to live active lives. Care plans were personalised, communication was adapted to each person, and relatives spoke positively about the care and support.

The home was clean and medicines were managed safely. Inspectors found that some staff were not consistently using the recommended COVID-19 rapid tests. They also heard about earlier short staffing and high staff turnover, although they found recent improvements. No regulations were breached, but the provider was given a recommendation about COVID-19 testing.

What inspectors praised
  • Respect and choice

    People were treated with dignity and encouraged to make their own decisions. Staff used creative ways to understand communication and support independence.

    “People were supported to make their own decisions and take the lead in their lives, staff respected people's decisions and promoted people making as many choices as possible.” from the report
  • Personalised care

    Care plans focused on each person's needs, preferences and what mattered to them. Families were involved in creating and reviewing support.

    “Each person had a detailed personalised care plan that focused on their needs, preferences and what was important to them.” from the report
  • Safe medicines

    Medicines were administered as prescribed, with personalised medicine records, staff training and regular checks.

    “Recording systems in place ensured that people's medication was administered as prescribed.” from the report
  • Positive culture

    Inspectors found a caring and open staff culture, with regular audits and efforts to reduce unnecessary intervention and restraint.

    “There was a positive, person centred culture amongst the staff team.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • COVID-19 rapid testing

    needs fixing

    Staff were not consistently using Lateral Flow Device tests in line with government guidance. Inspectors said this could mean some infections were missed and recommended that practice be updated.

    “However, staff were not consistently using Lateral Flow Device (LFD) tests that give a rapid result in line with government guidance.” from the report
  • Staffing consistency

    needs fixing

    Relatives and staff described earlier short staffing and high staff turnover. Inspectors found that this had improved, but said it had sometimes stopped people doing what they wanted.

    “Some family members told us of times the service had been short staffed and had a high turnover of staff.” from the report
  • Safeguarding training

    minor

    Some staff had not completed safeguarding training when inspectors visited. The training had been booked for the near future.

    “Some staff had not completed safeguarding training; this was booked to take place in the near future.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01Are all staff now completing Lateral Flow Device testing in line with current guidance?
  2. 02How many staff are normally on duty in each house, and what happens when someone is absent?
  3. 03Has staff turnover reduced, and how are you checking that people can take part in the activities they choose?
  4. 04Have all staff completed safeguarding training, and how is refresher training monitored?
  5. 05Who is now managing the home, and has the new manager's CQC registration application been completed?

This was the first planned inspection after registration and covered all five key questions; infection prevention and control was examined under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 January 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Lakenheath

Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.

  1. January 2022Goodcurrent rating
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Lakenheath →

  2. April 2019

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 April 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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Warrington

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. 90 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.

“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
John P., about Rodrigo Javier B.
See live-in carers near WarringtonProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.