CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Little Arches
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Staffing, recruitment, risk management and medicines were judged safe, although written protocols for some as-required medicines were still being formalised and some staff had false or painted nails.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and understood people's needs. People were supported with food, healthcare, independence and decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff asked permission, respected privacy and involved people in decisions about their care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. People had choices about their routines, activities, communication and community outings.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager was visible and knew people well. Quality checks were in place and the culture was described as open, supportive and person-centred.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with minor improvements needed to medicines guidance and infection control.
The inspection took place on 3 December 2019. One inspector spoke with all four people living at the home, three staff members and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
Inspectors found people were safe, treated kindly and supported to make choices. Staff understood people's needs, supported healthcare access, provided food and activities people chose, and helped people stay connected with their community.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published on 21 June 2017.
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels appropriate. Staff had time to support people and take them out to places they chose.
“There were enough staff to spend time with people including taking them out to places of their choice.” from the report
Kind relationships
People said they were happy, and inspectors observed warm and affectionate interactions between people and staff.
“Throughout the day we observed positive and affectionate interactions between people and staff.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make daily choices, develop life skills and take part in activities in the community.
“There was evidence that the core values of choice, promotion of independence and community inclusion were at the centre of people's day to day support.” from the report
Good leadership
The manager was a visible presence, knew people well and used audits to monitor quality and safety.
“The registered manager had a system for monitoring the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
As-required medicines guidance
needs fixingStaff had information about when people might need as-required medicines, but the home was still formalising this into written protocols.
“However, the registered manager was in the process of formalising this information into PRN protocols.” from the report
False or painted nails
needs fixingInspectors saw some staff wearing false or painted nails. The manager said this would be addressed immediately because it related to infection control.
“However, we saw some staff had false or painted nails. The registered manager told us this would be addressed immediately.” from the report
- 01Have the written protocols for people's as-required medicines now been completed?
- 02What action was taken after inspectors saw staff wearing false or painted nails?
- 03How are people's care plans and health plans kept up to date?
- 04How will you support my relative to choose activities and outings that matter to them?
- 05How can my relative and family take part in care reviews and give feedback?
This was a planned inspection of the care provided and premises, covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 December 2019 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, June 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with all five areas rated Good.
This was an announced inspection on 6 June 2017, with 48 hours' notice. The inspector spoke with all four people living at the home, staff and the registered manager. They also observed care and checked care records, medicines, staff files and quality checks.
People told inspectors they felt safe and supported. There were enough trained staff, medicines were managed safely, and safeguarding and emergency procedures were in place. People were involved in decisions about their care, meals, activities and holidays.
Inspectors saw respectful and encouraging relationships between staff and people. Care plans were written in a way people could understand and were reviewed when needs changed. The home had systems to gather feedback, handle complaints and monitor the quality of care.
The overall rating was Good, and each of the five areas was rated Good. The report says this was unchanged from the previous inspection.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe and supported. Staff understood how to recognise and respond to possible abuse.
“People we spoke with told us they felt safe and supported at the home.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in decisions about their care, meals, activities and holidays. Staff supported them to make choices and develop life skills.
“People were supported to live their lives in the way that they chose.” from the report
Respectful relationships
Inspectors saw staff speaking with people in a positive and encouraging way. Staff protected privacy and dignity.
“We observed staff interacting with people in a positive encouraging way.” from the report
Good oversight
The home had systems to monitor areas such as medicines, health and safety, infection control and fire safety. The manager checked actions and progress.
“There were effective and robust systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and review my relative's care plan and make sure it is easy for them to understand?
- 02What activities and community outings would be available for my relative, based on their interests?
- 03How would you support my relative to make decisions about meals, personal care and daily routines?
- 04How would you manage my relative's medicines, including any changes or controlled medicines?
- 05How can my relative and our family raise a concern or make a complaint, and how will you respond?
This was an announced inspection covering all five areas, with observations of care and checks of two people's care records, medicines, staff records and quality systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 June 2017 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 Little Arches
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 May 2013.
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.