CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Limetree House Upper Poppleton
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Limetree House Upper Poppleton was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safety, infection control, medicines and management checks needed strengthening.
This was a focused inspection on 31 March and 7 April 2022. It began as an infection control inspection but was widened after concerns about infection control and window safety. Inspectors looked only at Safe and Well-led.
People said they felt safe and supported. Staff were safely recruited, staffing levels were enough for people's needs, and accidents and incidents were reviewed. However, some windows were unsafe, parts of the building were difficult to clean, and medicines records and checks were not always reliable.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall, with Safe and Well-led both rated Requires Improvement. The other key question ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection. The overall rating fell from Good at the last inspection, published on 2 April 2020.
Staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found staffing levels were enough to meet people's individual needs. Recruitment checks were completed to help ensure staff were suitable.
“Staffing levels were safe and supported staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The home reviewed accidents and incidents and took action to reduce future risks.
“Accidents and incidents were monitored to see if lessons could be learnt to improve and keep people safe.” from the report
Communication
People and relatives spoke positively about communication. Managers held meetings with people and staff to share changes and gather views.
“People and relatives spoke positively about communication with the service and said they could raise any issues they had.” from the report
Infection control and building condition
needs fixingSeveral areas needed maintenance or refurbishment and could not be cleaned effectively. Inspectors also found problems with furniture, laundry areas and the handling of used protective equipment.
“Several areas of the home required maintenance and refurbishment, leading to areas that could not be cleaned effectively in order to prevent the risk of infection.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingSome topical medicines in circulation had been stopped or were not recorded correctly. Instructions for as-needed medicines were not always present or detailed enough.
“People had topical creams in circulation that had been discontinued.” from the report
Window safety
seriousSome window restrictors could be disengaged, and one window opened fully. Some first-floor windows also had risks that had not been considered.
“A window in one person's room was not sufficiently restricted and opened fully.” from the report
Management checks
needs fixingThe home's governance systems had not found or dealt with the problems identified during the inspection. Inspectors said management did not promote good infection control practice.
“Systems and processes had failed to identify the concerns we found during inspection.” from the report
- 01What work has been completed to make the windows safe, and how are window safety checks recorded now?
- 02What repairs or refurbishment have been completed in the areas that inspectors said could not be cleaned effectively?
- 03How are topical medicines checked to ensure stopped medicines are removed and all current medicines are recorded?
- 04How are instructions for as-needed medicines recorded and reviewed?
- 05What changes have been made to the home's governance checks so problems are identified sooner?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, following concerns about infection control and window safety; the other key question ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 May 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.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some records and refurbishment work needing attention.
Inspectors visited on 12 March 2020. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a visiting professional. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff recruitment and training documents, complaints and other records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives gave positive feedback. Inspectors found that care was tailored to people's needs, staff knew people well, medicines were given on time and health needs were managed.
There were some areas to improve. Not all details had transferred fully from paper care plans to electronic records. Some records needed more personal information. Parts of the home awaiting refurbishment did not meet best practice for infection control. The manager said these issues would be addressed.
Personalised care
Care and support were tailored to people's needs and preferences. Staff knew people's likes, dislikes and personalities well.
“Care and support was tailored to each person's needs and preferences.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors found that people were listened to and treated with dignity. Staff supported people's choices and independence.
“People were treated with kindness; they were actively listened to and their choices respected.” from the report
Medicines and health
People received medicines when they should. The home worked with healthcare professionals and supported people to access healthcare.
“People received their medicines on time and their health was well managed.” from the report
Activities and involvement
People took part in activities suited to their interests and were involved in decisions about their care and the home.
“People were supported with activities and interests to suit them and to aid their independence.” from the report
Care records
needs fixingSome information had not transferred fully from paper records to electronic care plans. The manager said the paper records would remain until the transfer was complete and that the records inspected would be updated.
“Some detail had not been fully transferred from paper to electronic care plans.” from the report
Personal detail in records
needs fixingSome care records did not contain enough information to fully reflect people's individual care and preferences. The manager said this would be addressed.
“Some records could have contained further information to ensure they reflected personalised care.” from the report
Refurbishment and infection control
needs fixingThe property was being refurbished. Some areas awaiting work did not meet infection control best practice, and the manager said these concerns would be addressed.
“Some areas of the home scheduled for refurbishment did not meet infection control best practice, for example sealed flooring to allow effective cleaning.” from the report
- 01Have all details now been transferred and checked in the electronic care plans?
- 02How do you make sure care records contain enough personal information about each resident's needs and preferences?
- 03Which refurbishment and infection control improvements have been completed, and what work remains?
- 04How will my relative and family be involved in developing and reviewing the care plan?
- 05What activities would be available for my relative based on their interests and abilities?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including care, medicines, records, staffing, the premises and how the home was managed. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 April 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.
Every inspection of Limetree House Upper Poppleton
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- May 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Limetree House Upper Poppleton →
- April 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Limetree House Upper Poppleton →
- September 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 February 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
37 live-in carers within about an hour of York
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 £1,270 a week. 32 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.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.