CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Lola's House Residential Home Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected by suitable staffing, safeguarding systems, safe medicines management and infection control. However, two recent residents did not have all their risk assessments in place, and fire safety grab bag information was out of date.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and person-centred. Staff had relevant training, people were supported with food and healthcare, and consent was sought in line with legal requirements.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. Staff knew people well and supported communication, independence and personal choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was planned around people's needs and preferences. People had access to activities, community opportunities, communication support and a complaints process.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open and transparent culture, regular checks and good involvement of people, relatives and staff. A more formal structure for some checks and oversight was still being developed.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Lola's House Residential Home Limited is rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some records needing prompt updating.
Inspectors visited without notice on 13 July 2023. They spoke with four people, two relatives, three staff members, the manager, the cook and the owners. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff recruitment files and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. People were supported by enough staff, received medicines safely, and were treated with kindness and respect. Care was personalised, activities were provided, and people and relatives said their concerns were listened to.
There were some shortfalls in record keeping. Two people who had recently moved in did not have all their risks recorded, and the fire safety grab bag was not up to date. The manager said these issues, along with some medicines recording points, were corrected immediately after the inspection.
This was the first inspection of the newly registered service. The report says the previous provider had been rated Inadequate in December 2022, so the current Good rating reflects the service under the new registration and new owners.
Personalised care
Care plans contained detailed information about people's wishes, preferences and support needs. Staff were expected to use this information when providing care.
“Care plans were person-centred and contained detailed information for staff to follow to ensure people received care as they wished.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives described the care positively. Inspectors found that staff supported people's dignity, privacy, independence and communication.
“People were treated with kindness and compassion. One person said, "[It's] good care. [It's] clean and [I'm] well cared for, [I'm] happy with the place.” from the report
Activities and choice
People were supported to take part in personal and organised activities, use outdoor spaces and access the community.
“People were supported to enjoy activities personal to them, such as knitting, as well as organised activities, such as a Coronation party.” from the report
Open management
Inspectors found that managers were approachable and that regular checks, staff meetings and discussions about improvement had started.
“The registered manager ensured staff were well-supported and had an open-door policy. There was a culture of openness and transparency.” from the report
Risk records were incomplete
needs fixingTwo people who had recently moved in did not have risk assessments for every aspect of their care. The report says this was corrected after the inspection, but it recommends reviewing the time taken to complete and update assessments.
“However, two people who had recently moved to the service did not have risk assessments in place for all aspects of their care.” from the report
Fire safety information was out of date
needs fixingInformation in the fire safety grab bag had not been updated at the time of the visit. The manager confirmed this was corrected immediately afterwards.
“Information in the fire safety 'grab bag' had not been updated.” from the report
Formal oversight was still developing
minorThe owners had daily oversight and regular checks were taking place, but a more formal structure for checks and oversight was still being developed.
“We discussed with the owners how they would develop a more formal structure of checks and oversight in the future.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure risk assessments are completed for every new resident before or soon after they move in?
- 02How often is the fire safety grab bag checked, and who is responsible for updating it?
- 03What changes have you made to record topical creams and medicines given when needed?
- 04What formal checks and oversight arrangements have been introduced since the inspection?
- 05How do you involve residents and relatives in care planning, activities and decisions about the home?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, the premises and care provided, and infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 August 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.
Every inspection of Lola's House Residential Home Limited
6 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- August 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Lola's House Residential Home Limited →
- December 2022Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- May 2019Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2018Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- August 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2023
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 April 2023.
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
16 live-in carers within about an hour of East Riding of Yorkshire
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 £1,030 to £1,420 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
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.