CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Lancum House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and reviewed, staff knew how to report abuse, and there were enough staff to provide safe care. Medicines and infection control were also managed safely.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- The report does not give a separate rating for Effective or provide a detailed finding under this question.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew people well, offered choices and supported independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- The report does not give a separate rating for Responsive or provide a detailed finding under this question.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found that the management team used regular audits and acted on issues identified. The service worked openly and involved people, relatives and staff in giving feedback.
What inspectors found, June 2021
Lancum House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with some minor recording and social contact issues.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 01 June 2021. Inspectors spoke with 10 people, 10 staff members and health professionals. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines records, recruitment files, staff rotas, training records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Caring and Well-led were also rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff, safer medicines systems, regular risk reviews and good infection control. People said they felt safe and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
The home had improved since the previous inspection, which was rated Requires Improvement. Staffing was more stable and management and quality checks had improved. The home was no longer in breach of Regulation 17, which concerns good governance.
Stable staffing
Staffing had improved since the previous inspection. There was a stable permanent team, with agency staff used only occasionally.
“Improvements had been made and there was a stable team of permanent staff.” from the report
Safe care
Risks were reviewed as people's needs changed, and staff had guidance to reduce known risks. Inspectors found enough staff to provide safe care.
“People were cared for safely. Risk assessments were in place and reviewed regularly, and as people's needs changed.” from the report
Strong management checks
The management team had strengthened quality checks and acted when issues were found. People and staff were also asked for their views.
“There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality and standards of the service.” from the report
Limited time for conversation
minorSome people said they would like staff to have more time to stop and chat. Inspectors did not find this had a negative impact on care.
“Some people told us they would like it if staff had more time to stop and chat with them.” from the report
Recording gaps
minorA compliance check found gaps in repositioning charts and cleaning schedules. The issue was raised with staff and addressed promptly.
“The registered manager and a recent full compliance audit had identified some recording gaps with repositioning charts and cleaning schedules.” from the report
- 01How will you make sure staff have enough time to stop and chat with people who want more social contact?
- 02How are repositioning charts checked now to make sure records are complete?
- 03How are cleaning schedules checked after the recording gaps found in the inspection?
- 04How often are staffing levels adjusted to match people's changing care needs?
- 05How will people and relatives be involved in the planned changes to care planning and refurbishment?
This was an unannounced planned inspection based on the previous rating; the report gives ratings for Safe, Caring and Well-led, and does not give separate ratings for Effective or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 June 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.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection-control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 16 March 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control in response to COVID-19 outbreaks in care homes.
Inspectors found safe arrangements for visitors, including testing, temperature checks, hand sanitiser, protective equipment and health questionnaires. The home had enhanced cleaning, enough protective equipment, regular COVID-19 testing and arrangements to support social distancing.
Staff worked flexibly as a team, with little use of agency staff. Infection-control audits were carried out regularly and actions were followed up promptly. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Visitor safety
Visitors had to follow several safety measures, including rapid testing, temperature checks, hand sanitising, protective equipment and a questionnaire.
“Safe arrangements were in place for visitors to the service including health professionals, and relatives when it was safe to do so.” from the report
Cleaning and protective equipment
The home used enhanced cleaning and had sufficient stocks of masks, gloves, aprons and hand sanitiser. Staff were observed using protective equipment appropriately.
“There were sufficient stocks of PPE including masks, gloves, aprons and hand sanitiser.” from the report
Testing and outbreak control
People living in the home and staff were tested regularly. The inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent or manage infection outbreaks.
“Regular testing for COVID-19 was in place for staff and people who lived in the service.” from the report
Monitoring infection control
Infection-control audits were completed regularly, with actions identified and followed up promptly.
“Infection prevention and control audits were undertaken regularly by the registered manager and a compliance manager.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What arrangements are currently used for visitors, including testing, protective equipment and hand hygiene?
- 02How often are people living in the home and staff tested for COVID-19 or other infections now?
- 03How does the home identify and follow up actions from infection-control audits?
- 04What is the current plan if there is an infection outbreak?
- 05What are the home's current arrangements for social distancing and shared dining or communal areas?
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 March 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 Lancum House
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 December 2010.
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
89 live-in carers within about an hour of North Northamptonshire
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. 76 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
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.