CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 248 Lidgett Lane
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm. Risk assessments, staffing levels, infection control and safeguarding arrangements were found to be suitable, although medicines management and some recruitment checks were not always fully safe.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not assessed in this inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not assessed in this inspection, although inspectors described care as person-centred and respectful in the overall findings.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not assessed in this inspection, although the report describes support tailored to people's needs, wishes and cultural requirements.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and staff promoted a person-centred culture. There was a clear management structure, regular audits and an improvement plan, although communication with relatives was not always consistent.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found people were safe and well supported, but medicines checks and some staff recruitment records needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 7 and 8 November 2023. Inspectors met all five people living in the home, spoke with staff, the manager and relatives, and checked care records, medicines, training, recruitment and management information.
The home was rated Good overall, with Safe and Well-led also rated Good. Inspectors found suitable staffing, clear risk assessments, good infection control and respectful, person-centred support. People were supported with their health, choices, culture and community access.
There were some weaknesses. Medicines booking information was not always correct, medicine storage temperatures were not recorded, and some recruitment checks were incomplete before staff started. The manager had identified these issues and was taking action before the inspection.
Risk management
People had detailed risk assessments covering areas such as health, nutrition, choking, community access and emergencies. These were reviewed and updated.
“The risks to people's safety and wellbeing were assessed, monitored and managed.” from the report
Person-centred support
Staff knew people well and supported their choices, independence, health needs and cultural or spiritual preferences.
“This enabled people to receive compassionate and empowering care that was tailored to their needs.” from the report
Leadership and improvement
The new manager had introduced changes, identified areas for improvement and used audits, meetings and reviews to improve the service.
“There was a clear structure of governance in place.” from the report
Infection control
The home had cleaning schedules, staff training, audits and appropriate arrangements for preventing and managing infection outbreaks.
“There were appropriate systems for preventing and controlling the spread of infection.” from the report
Medicines checks
needs fixingMedicines were usually given safely and as prescribed, but booking information was sometimes wrong and storage temperatures were not recorded. Audits had not identified all the issues.
“Medicines were not always managed to ensure complete safety.” from the report
Staff turnover
minorThere had been a large turnover of staff, which relatives said affected continuity for some people. Inspectors said this had improved recently.
“There has been a large turnover of staff, however this has improved recently.” from the report
Communication with relatives
minorRelatives gave mixed feedback. Some said they were kept updated, while another had not received updates for several weeks and suggested a communication book.
“Another relative felt that communication could be better, saying, "Im getting some updates, or I was, they come by email, but I haven't had any for a few weeks now.” from the report
- 01How are medicines booking errors now checked and corrected?
- 02How are medicine storage temperatures recorded and reviewed?
- 03What checks are completed before a new staff member starts work?
- 04Has staff turnover remained improved since the inspection?
- 05How will you keep relatives updated consistently about changes and concerns?
This inspection only assessed the Safe and Well-led key questions; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 December 2023 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, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention, visiting arrangements and COVID-related staffing measures.
Inspectors visited the home on 25 January 2022. This was an announced, targeted inspection focused on infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and any staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
They found policies for managing COVID-19 risks, enough personal protective equipment, handwashing facilities and regular cleaning schedules. Staff had received infection control and PPE training, and testing arrangements were in place for residents and staff.
Inspectors were assured that visitors were screened, visits followed current guidance, and the home could prevent or manage infection outbreaks. Staff also supported residents' social and emotional wellbeing and helped them attend outside events with risk assessments and testing.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a full rating for all five areas of care.
Cleaning and hygiene
The home had regular cleaning plans covering routine cleaning, touch points and deeper cleaning.
“Daily, weekly and monthly cleaning schedules were in place, which included touch point and deep cleaning.” from the report
PPE and staff training
Inspectors found supplies of PPE and hand hygiene facilities. Staff had been trained in infection prevention and control and PPE use.
“Staff had been trained in infection prevention and control (IPC) and the use of PPE.” from the report
Testing and visits
Testing was carried out for residents and staff, and visitors were screened using vaccination and COVID test information.
“A programme of COVID testing for both people living in the home and staff was undertaken in line with current government guidance.” from the report
Residents' wellbeing
Staff continued to support residents' social and emotional wellbeing and helped them attend outside events using COVID-related checks.
“Staff supported the social and emotional wellbeing of residents and had done so throughout the pandemic.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently managing infection prevention, cleaning and PPE?
- 02What are your current arrangements for COVID-19 testing, symptoms and possible outbreaks?
- 03How can families visit now, and what screening or vaccination requirements apply?
- 04How do you make sure staffing pressures do not affect residents' care and support?
- 05How are residents currently supported to attend external events and maintain their social and emotional wellbeing?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other four key questions or give an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 February 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.
Every inspection of 248 Lidgett Lane
4 rated inspections over 9 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leeds
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. 89 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.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.