CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Middlefields House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems and risk assessments that were reviewed when people’s needs changed. Infection prevention and control arrangements were also found to be good.
- Effective?
- Good
- People’s needs were assessed before they moved in. Staff had suitable training and worked with health professionals, although food trolleys were delayed on the first day.
- Caring?
- Good
- People described staff as kind, caring, friendly and helpful. Inspectors observed respectful care, prompt responses and support for privacy, dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people’s histories, preferences and communication needs. People were supported with activities, relationships, religious interests and end of life choices.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had effective checks on care, medicines, staff records and satisfaction. One incident was not reported to CQC, but the home had reported it to the local authority and took action to keep the person safe.
What inspectors found, December 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a delay in delivering food trolleys and one missed notification.
This was the home’s first inspection since it registered. Inspectors visited without warning on 8 and 14 November 2022. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers, observed care, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines support, suitable training, good infection control and systems to manage risks.
People were treated kindly and staff understood their individual needs. Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People could join activities, keep in touch with family and friends, and receive support with their religious and cultural preferences.
There were two points to keep in mind. Food trolleys were delayed on the first inspection day, although managers were taking action. One incident had not been reported to CQC, which the manager described as an oversight.
Kind and respectful staff
People spoke positively about staff, and inspectors saw staff respond promptly without rushing people.
“People were treated with kindness and were positive about the staff's caring attitude.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people’s life histories, preferences and communication needs. Staff showed they understood how each person wanted to be supported.
“People had been supported to develop care plans specific to them.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Staffing levels were based on assessed needs and records showed those levels had been provided. Medicine records were complete and as-required medicines had clear instructions.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could take part in group and individual activities and were supported to maintain contact with family and friends.
“People were supported to take part in a range of group and individual activities.” from the report
Good oversight
Managers used checks, feedback and incident reviews to plan improvements and learn lessons.
“The provider had effective quality assurance systems in place.” from the report
Delay with food trolleys
needs fixingInspectors saw a delay in food trolleys reaching the households on the first day. Managers said they were taking action, including recruiting extra staff, so the coffee shop would not affect mealtimes.
“On the first day of the inspection we noticed there was a delay in food trolleys being delivered to the households.” from the report
One missed CQC notification
needs fixingOne incident between people had not been reported to CQC. The home had taken action to keep the person safe and reported the incident to the local authority.
“We identified one example of an incident between people that had not been reported to us.” from the report
- 01What has changed to prevent delays in food trolleys reaching the households?
- 02How do you now check that incidents which must be reported to CQC are notified promptly?
- 03How would you support my relative’s religious or cultural preferences if they are not Christian?
- 04How are my relative’s care plan and risk assessments reviewed when their needs change?
- 05What activities and one-to-one companionship would be available for my relative?
This was the home’s first comprehensive inspection, covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control arrangements. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 December 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.
Every inspection of Middlefields House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 August 2021.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about two hours of Wiltshire
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 £1,020 to £1,340 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Linet became her carer and all changed, my daughter started eating, taking her medications and more important her happiness came back.”
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
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.