CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Moorpine
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with all five areas rated Good.
The inspection took place on 28 February 2020 and was a planned inspection based on the previous Good rating. One inspector reviewed care, medicines and management records, spoke with staff and the manager, and contacted two family members by telephone.
The home supported up to three people with a learning disability, with two people living there at the time. Inspectors found that risks and medicines were managed safely, staff were trained, and people were supported with healthcare and daily choices.
Families described staff as kind and respectful. Care plans recorded people's preferences, communication needs and goals. People were supported to take part in activities and maintain links with the community.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found the service was meeting the relevant requirements and providing consistently good care at the time of the inspection.
Risk management
Inspectors found that risks were understood and managed, and that the home used learning from incidents to reduce the chance of them happening again.
“Risks were well managed. Staff understood potential risks and how to mitigate them.” from the report
Trained staff
Staff completed required training as well as training linked to the needs of the people living at the home. New staff also received a full induction.
“Staff were appropriately trained. Staff completed mandatory training and additional training specific to the needs of the people who used the service.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Families told inspectors that staff were kind and considerate. People were supported as individuals and treated with dignity.
“People were treated as individuals and staff supported them to live their lives how they wanted.” from the report
Personalised activities
The home supported people to take part in activities based on their needs, interests and likes, helping them avoid social isolation.
“The provider had developed structured, person-centred programmes based on people's needs, likes and interests.” from the report
Quality monitoring
Managers checked the quality of the service, gathered feedback and used self-evaluation to identify improvements.
“The provider and registered manager monitored the quality of the service to make sure they delivered a high standard of care.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and manage my relative's particular risks and changing needs?
- 02What training have staff had for my relative's learning disability, communication needs and behaviours?
- 03How will you involve my relative and our family in care planning and reviews?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available based on my relative's interests?
- 05How do staff and senior managers communicate, and what changes were made after communication was identified as an issue?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, but inspectors could not speak directly with people living at the home and instead spoke with two family members by telephone. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 March 2020 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, September 2017
Moorpine is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with all five areas remaining Good.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 9 August 2017. The inspector reviewed care records, staff recruitment and training records, staffing information, meetings, maintenance records and quality checks. They also observed care and spoke with people, staff, management and a relative.
Two people were living in the home at the time. Inspectors found enough staff, detailed care and risk records, suitable recruitment checks and trained staff. People appeared calm and relaxed. Staff supported people to communicate, make choices, learn skills and take part in activities and community life.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as at the previous inspection in June 2015. The report says the home met each of the fundamental standards inspected.
Stable staffing
There were enough staff to provide individual care, and the staff team was stable at the time of inspection.
“There were no staff vacancies at the time of inspection and this meant a stable, staff team was in place” from the report
Personalised communication
Staff knew how people communicated, including through non-verbal signs and communication technology. This helped staff understand people's wishes and discomfort.
“People also used apps that had been programmed on their individual IPad to assist with their communication.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were patient and respectful. They asked permission before tasks and protected people's privacy and dignity.
“We observed staff were patient in their interactions with people and took time to listen and observe people's verbal and non-verbal communication.” from the report
Activities and independence
People were supported to take part in varied activities, keep relationships, access the community and learn daily living skills.
“People were supported to learn new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Checks on quality
The home used regular checks covering care, safety, incidents, complaints and staff records. Actions identified through these checks were monitored.
“Regular audits were completed internally to monitor service provision and to ensure the safety of people who lived in the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would medicines be managed safely if a resident needed them in future?
- 02How are the two people's authorised restrictions reviewed, and how are they supported to make choices?
- 03How do you keep staffing levels flexible when residents want to go out or take part in activities?
- 04How do you use communication technology, pictures or signs to understand a person's wishes and signs of discomfort?
- 05What actions have recent audits or incident reviews led to?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led; all five ratings were assessed as Good and remained unchanged from June 2015. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 September 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 Moorpine
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 January 2011.
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.