CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Montrose Barn
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found robust recruitment checks, safe staffing levels, suitable risk assessments and safe medicines systems. Some visiting restrictions were in place because of specific safety concerns.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and assessed as competent to meet people's complex needs. People were supported with nutrition, healthcare, independence, communication and decision-making.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- People were treated with exceptional kindness, dignity and respect. Staff understood people's communication and supported them to control their routines, personal care and appearance.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Support was highly personalised and based on people's wishes, goals and communication needs. People were helped to develop skills, take part in activities and access their community.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- Inspectors found strong, visible and person-centred leadership. Quality checks, staff involvement and partnership working were used to improve care and support people's independence.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Montrose Barn is rated Outstanding overall; inspectors found exceptionally caring, responsive and well-led support, with safe and effective care rated Good.
This was a focused inspection after concerns were received about staff recruitment. One inspector visited on 24 March 2023, spoke with people and managers, observed care, checked records and staff files, and received feedback from staff and health and social care professionals.
The home was found to provide safe and effective care. Recruitment checks, staffing levels, medicines management, infection control and risk management were all judged satisfactory. Staff knew people well and supported them to try activities, build skills and take positive risks.
Inspectors rated caring, responsive and well-led as Outstanding. People were supported to make choices, stay independent, communicate their wishes and take part in activities. The overall rating remained Outstanding, as it was at the previous inspection published on 21 November 2019.
Safe staffing
The recruitment concerns that prompted the inspection were investigated. Inspectors found the recruitment process robust, with the required checks completed before staff started work.
“We reviewed recruitment records and found the registered manager had a robust recruitment process.” from the report
Kind relationships
Staff knew people very well and built trusting relationships while keeping appropriate professional boundaries.
“The care and support people received was exceptionally compassionate and kind.” from the report
Personalised support
Care planning reflected people's health, social needs, wishes, goals and communication methods. Staff adapted support to help people express themselves.
“People's care records were comprehensive and reflected their health and social needs.” from the report
Strong leadership
The home had a clear person-centred culture. Managers used audits, staff feedback and partnership working to drive improvement.
“Effective quality assurance checks were carried out by key staff members.” from the report
Visiting restrictions
minorSome restrictions on visiting were in place because of specific safety concerns. Ask what these restrictions involved and how family contact would be supported.
“Specific safety concerns meant there were some restrictions in relation to visiting to ensure people's safety.” from the report
- 01What were the specific safety concerns that led to restrictions on visiting?
- 02How would my relative be supported to keep in contact with family if visiting restrictions applied?
- 03How do you check that staffing levels continue to match each person's needs and planned activities?
- 04How are new staff assessed as competent before they support people independently?
- 05How would you support my relative to develop independence, communicate their wishes and take part in activities they choose?
The inspection was prompted by recruitment concerns, included infection prevention and control, and reviewed care, staffing, records, policies, observations and feedback across all five key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 July 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.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Rated Outstanding overall; inspectors found especially responsive and well-led care, with safe, effective and caring support rated Good.
This was a planned inspection on 17 September 2019. One inspector met both residents, spoke with one resident, observed staff, spoke with staff and gathered views from professionals and a relative. The inspector also checked care plans, medicines records, staff records, health and safety records and other service records.
The home was safe, effective and caring, each rated Good. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and kind, respectful support. People were helped to make choices, stay independent, access healthcare and take part in activities.
Responsive care and leadership were rated Outstanding. Inspectors found exceptional support for independence, community involvement and individual interests. The overall rating improved from Good at the previous inspection, while the well-led rating remained Outstanding.
Personalised activities
Activities were shaped around each person's interests, abilities and communication style. People were supported to develop relationships and take part in local community life.
“The service was exceptional in the way they supported people to learn new skills and maintain their independence.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw friendly interactions and found that staff understood people's personal histories, preferences and ways of communicating.
“People were supported by staff who were kind and caring.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff were trained to give medicines safely, stock was checked regularly and people's medicines were reviewed.
“People received their medicines safely from staff who had received training to carry out the task.” from the report
Strong leadership
The report describes a clear person-centred culture, committed staff and quality checks that were used to identify and share improvements.
“The registered manager and staff team demonstrated this clear vision and a highly positive person-centred culture was seen throughout as reported here.” from the report
Communication system under review
minorOne interactive system intended to help people understand activities had not worked as well as expected. The home was exploring other options, although other communication tools were also in use.
“This had not been as effective as expected but was still in place as other options were explored.” from the report
End of life wishes
minorThe home was still exploring ways to identify people's wishes about end of life care. Families should ask how these conversations are supported and recorded.
“The service was exploring ways of identifying people's wishes to support end of life care and support if it was required.” from the report
- 01How will you find out and record my relative's wishes about end of life care?
- 02Which communication methods work best for my relative, and how will you review them if they are not effective?
- 03How will my relative be supported to develop independence and take part in activities they enjoy?
- 04How will you involve my relative and our family in reviewing their care and support plans?
- 05How do you make sure medicines remain suitable and are given safely?
This was a planned inspection covering all five key questions, with observations, discussions and checks of selected care, medicines, staffing and service records. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 November 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 Montrose Barn
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- July 2023Outstandingcurrent ratingstayed OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- November 2019Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 December 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
10 live-in carers within about two hours of Cornwall
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 £1,200 a week. 8 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“He had been a little anxious before she arrived, but has since stated that he would be very happy for her to care for him again”
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.