CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Meldan
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe recruitment, regular safety checks and safe medicines management. One risk assessment for using a harness needed more detail, and this was updated during the inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had appropriate training, supervision and support. Inspectors found some mental capacity decisions were not specific enough, and one care plan did not fully describe the support being provided.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff supported privacy, choice and independence, and relatives were involved in care planning.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported with activities, communication, religious needs and individual goals, and complaints were investigated and used for learning.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager understood their responsibilities and had a clear plan focused on independence. Regular audits, meetings, feedback and action plans were used to monitor and improve the service.
What inspectors found, February 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with some records needing improvement.
This was the home's first fully comprehensive inspection. Inspectors visited on 4 and 5 December 2018, spoke with one person, relatives and staff, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and safety records.
The home supported up to four people with learning disabilities and autism. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines management, clean premises and staff who treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were supported to make choices, build independence and take part in activities in the local community.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found some care and decision-making records were not fully detailed, but the manager took action during the inspection to improve them.
Support for independence
People were supported to choose their activities and develop everyday skills. One person was working towards living in their own property.
“The registered manager worked with staff to promote the independence of people living at the service to help to enable them to achieve their aspirations for life.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans covered people's physical, emotional, social, cultural and religious needs. Staff adapted communication and support to each person.
“Each care plan we viewed was person centred and they contained detailed instructions for carrying out people's care.” from the report
Good oversight
The home used regular audits, staff meetings, feedback and complaint reviews to identify improvements.
“There was a robust governance framework in place which documented regular auditing of the service by the registered manager and provider.” from the report
Harness risk assessment
seriousOne risk assessment for using a harness needed further development. The manager completed a new assessment during the inspection.
“We found one risk assessment for the use of a harness required that required further development.” from the report
Specific decision records
needs fixingSome mental capacity and best-interest records did not clearly relate to one particular decision. The manager reviewed these during the inspection.
“This meant people's rights to make particular decisions may not have been always upheld and their freedom to make decisions may not have been maximised.” from the report
Care plan detail
needs fixingOne care plan did not fully record the amount and type of support being provided. The manager agreed to update it.
“We did note that one person's care plan did not fully document the support the person required.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to the harness risk assessment, and how is it reviewed now?
- 02How do you make sure mental capacity assessments relate to each specific decision?
- 03How do you check that care plans accurately describe the support each person receives?
- 04How are staffing levels reviewed if a person's needs or requirements change?
- 05How would you record and follow a person's end-of-life choices if their needs changed?
This was the home's first fully comprehensive inspection and covered all five CQC questions, including care, records, medicines, staffing, premises and management. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 February 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.
Every inspection of Meldan
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- February 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 January 2018.
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
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Sunderland
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 £950 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.