CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Moorlands Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and staff knew how to recognise and report abuse. Medicines, infection control, risk assessments and staffing arrangements were found to be safe.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care plans were comprehensive. Staff supported people's health, nutrition and legal rights, and worked with healthcare professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They could make choices about their daily routines, personal care and privacy.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and staff knew people's preferences. However, inspectors found limited social stimulation because there was no activity worker in post at the time.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The registered manager was visible and approachable, and quality checks were carried out. The provider had action plans for improvements and acted on recommendations.
What inspectors found, December 2022
Moorlands Residential Home rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but limited activities and some building improvements were still needed.
This was an unannounced inspection by two inspectors on 15 November 2022. They spoke with nine people living at the home, a visitor and four staff members. They also observed care and checked medicines, health and safety records, recruitment files and care plans.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe, were happy with their care and were treated with kindness and respect. Medicines were managed safely, care plans were detailed and staff worked with health professionals to meet people's needs.
Inspectors found some areas that needed attention. There were limited activities while the home waited for a new activity worker to complete safety checks. Some carpets and areas of decoration needed improvement, although the new provider had started making changes.
Safe medicines
People received medicines safely from trained staff. The medicine trolley was kept locked when unsupervised and regular audits were completed.
“People told us they were given the right medicines at the right time.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and respected their choices, privacy and dignity. People could choose their routines and who supported them with personal care.
“Throughout the day we saw kind and gentle interactions from staff.” from the report
Good health support
Staff worked with nurses, GPs and other professionals. Inspectors saw that health concerns were followed up and people's care improved.
“The staff worked with healthcare professionals to make sure people received care which met their needs.” from the report
Strong oversight
The registered manager monitored the home and used audits, meetings and surveys to identify and act on improvements.
“The registered manager carried out a series of quality assurance audits to make sure good standards of care and support were maintained.” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingThere were limited opportunities for social stimulation while the home had no activity worker. A new worker had been recruited but was waiting for safety checks to finish.
“Some people were able to occupy themselves with reading and colouring but at the time of the inspection there was limited social stimulation for people.” from the report
Building needs refurbishment
minorSome carpets needed deep cleaning or replacement, and some areas needed redecorating. The provider had begun improvements and planned further work when rooms became vacant.
“Some areas of the home would benefit from refurbishment.” from the report
One incomplete recruitment record
minorOne staff member's application did not include a full employment history. The registered manager said this would be added to the record.
“One staff member had not provided a full employment history on their application form; other staff members records we looked at had complete histories.” from the report
- 01Has the new activity worker started, and what activities are now available for people who want more social stimulation?
- 02Which carpets and areas of decoration have been improved since the inspection, and what work is still planned?
- 03How was the missing employment history completed and checked for the staff member identified in the report?
- 04How often are medicines, care records and other quality checks reviewed, and can families hear about any actions arising from them?
- 05How can relatives share concerns or complaints, and what response time should they expect under the complaints policy?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control; it was the first inspection since the current provider registered the service, while the previous provider's rating was Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 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 Moorlands Residential Home
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 October 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
76 live-in carers within about two hours of Somerset
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 £1,370 a week. 62 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
“She was not phased by anything, she was adaptable, kind & gave us complete confidence to go away & not worry about a thing!”
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.