CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Merrivale Farm
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks, medicines, staffing, infection control, and accidents were managed through recorded plans and procedures.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed and reviewed. Staff had training and support, and worked with health and social care professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness and compassion. They promoted privacy, dignity, independence, equality and involvement in decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were individual and reflected people's histories, preferences and needs. People were supported with activities, work opportunities, hobbies and accessible information.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open and supportive management culture, with systems to monitor care quality and safety. Some written policies needed review or further development.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Merrivale Farm was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some policies needing review.
This was an unannounced inspection by one inspector on 2 August 2019. The inspector spoke with four people living at the home, the owners, the registered manager and three care workers. They also spoke with three relatives and three community health and social care professionals.
The inspectors reviewed care records, medicines records, staff training and recruitment records, accident and incident records, policies, and records about the premises and how the service was managed. They found that people were safe, supported by trained staff, involved in decisions, and treated with kindness and respect.
The home provided personalised care for seven people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder, with space for up to eight people. The overall rating was Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
The previous inspection, published on 7 March 2017, also rated the service Good. The report noted that some written policies needed review or further development, and that staff supervision procedures were being reviewed for consistency.
Personalised support
Care was planned around each person's needs, history and preferences. People and relatives were involved in care planning and reviews.
“People's care plans were individual to them and contained information about their personal history and preferences” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors found warm relationships between staff and the people living at the home. Relatives and professionals also spoke positively about the care.
“The trust you can see between people and staff is excellent.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in everyday decisions and supported to do things for themselves, including work around the farm and community activities.
“People spoke to us with pride about how they contributed towards the running of their home on a daily basis.” from the report
Activities and community links
People were supported to pursue hobbies, attend activities and use community opportunities. The home had a minibus for regular trips out.
“The home had its own minibus, enabling people get out and about on a regular basis.” from the report
Safe care arrangements
Risks were assessed and managed, medicines records were accurate, and staffing arrangements were considered suitable for people's needs.
“The risks associated with the premises, equipment and people's individual care needs had been assessed and plans were in place to manage these.” from the report
Policies needed updating
needs fixingSome written policies were not sufficiently current or complete. The registered manager said they were receiving support to improve them.
“We found some of the provider's written policies and procedures were in need of review or further development, to ensure they were sufficiently robust, comprehensive and up-to-date.” from the report
Consistency of staff supervision
needs fixingStaff said they had regular one-to-one support, but the home was reviewing its supervision procedures to make sure meetings happened consistently.
“The registered manager informed us they were currently reviewing staff supervision procedures, to ensure these meetings took place on a consistent basis.” from the report
- 01Have all the written policies identified in the report now been reviewed and updated?
- 02How do you make sure staff supervision meetings take place consistently?
- 03How will you involve my relative in their care plan, menu choices and day-to-day decisions?
- 04What activities, work opportunities and community visits would be available for my relative?
- 05How would you respond if my relative's health needs, risks or support needs changed?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection that looked at the care provided, the premises and all five CQC questions; all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 August 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, March 2017
Merrivale Farm is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with gaps in induction and reporting.
The inspection took place on 15 and 20 February 2017. The first day was unannounced. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and other representatives. Records, medicines and quality checks were also reviewed.
The home supported eight people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness and supported by staff who knew them well. Care was tailored to people's needs, choices and interests. Staff supported people with food, medicines, health appointments and everyday activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. There were two issues to improve. Managers were not fully aware of the Care Certificate requirements for new staff, and an important notification about a DoLS application had not been sent to CQC because of an oversight.
People felt safe
People and relatives said the home was a safe place. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse and how to manage individual risks.
“People were protected from avoidable harm and abuse.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff took time to understand people's personalities, needs and preferred ways of being supported. People were treated with dignity and their privacy was respected.
“Staff treated people with kindness and compassion and had taken the time to get to know them well.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's backgrounds, interests, preferences, health and daily living needs. Staff supported people to take part in activities they enjoyed.
“People received care and support that was shaped around their individual needs, wishes and preferences.” from the report
Positive management
People, relatives and staff described managers as approachable and inclusive. Staff felt listened to and supported.
“The management team promoted a positive and inclusive culture within the service.” from the report
Food and health support
People had enough to eat and drink, could influence menus and received help with special diets. Staff also supported people to attend healthcare appointments and manage long-term conditions.
“People were supported to have enough to eat and drink, and to maintain a balanced diet.” from the report
New staff induction
needs fixingManagers did not know that the Care Certificate should be included in induction training for new care staff. They said they would update future induction training.
“We found the management team lacked awareness of the need to incorporate the Care Certificate within their induction training.” from the report
Important notification missed
needs fixingThe registered manager had not told CQC the outcome of one DoLS application. The report says this was an oversight and records the manager's assurance that future notifications would be made correctly.
“They had not told us about the outcome of a DoLS application made for one of the people living at the home, due to an oversight on their part.” from the report
- 01How are new staff inducted now, and how is the Care Certificate included?
- 02How do you check that all required notifications, including DoLS outcomes, are sent to CQC on time?
- 03How will you assess whether staffing levels continue to meet my relative's needs as their needs or activities change?
- 04How will my relative be involved in reviewing their care plan and making decisions about risks and daily activities?
- 05What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative based on their interests?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, and all five ratings were given. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 March 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 Merrivale Farm
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 November 2010.
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
11 live-in carers within about an hour of Herefordshire, County of
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 £960 to £1,410 a week. 10 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.