CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Neat Marsh House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that safeguarding, risk management, staffing, recruitment, medicines and infection control were handled safely. Accidents and incidents were monitored for patterns and learning.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs, including health, nutrition, mobility and communication needs, were assessed and recorded. Staff were trained, supervised and worked with health professionals and other agencies.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were described as caring, respectful and compassionate. People were involved in daily decisions, and their privacy, dignity, diversity and independence were supported.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences, routines and needs. The home supported communication, family contact, community activities, complaints and end of life care.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive and collaborative culture. Audits, meetings and satisfaction surveys were used to identify improvements, and the registered manager understood their regulatory responsibilities.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care with good management across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection on 25 October 2019. One inspector observed people in their flats, spoke with the registered manager and three staff, and reviewed care, medicine, incident, recruitment, training and quality records.
The home supported four people with learning disabilities and/or autism. Inspectors found that people were protected from harm, received their medicines safely and had enough suitable staff. Staff understood people's needs, supported their health and communication, and respected their privacy, choices and independence.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found consistently good outcomes and care that met people's needs. The previous inspection, published in June 2017, also rated the home Good.
Safety systems
Safeguarding, risk assessments, medicines, staffing and infection control were all found to be safely managed. The home also reviewed incidents to reduce the chance of them happening again.
“People were protected from harm and risk, as safeguarding and risk management systems were followed.” from the report
Respectful staff
Staff treated people with kindness and respect. They supported privacy, dignity, independence and personal choices.
“People were supported by caring, understanding and compassionate staff, who respected people's privacy, dignity, independence and diversity.” from the report
Choice and independence
People had individual flats and were supported to develop skills, make choices and take part in community life.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used audits, meetings and surveys to monitor care and address shortfalls. Records showed when planned actions had been completed.
“Quality checks and audits were completed as per the requirements of the organisation.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you make sure each person still receives the one-to-one support described in the report?
- 02How are positive behaviour support plans reviewed when a person's needs or behaviour changes?
- 03How do you check that medicines are given and recorded as prescribed?
- 04How do you support people who use Makaton or other communication methods to understand information and make choices?
- 05What improvements have resulted from your latest audits, staff meetings and satisfaction surveys?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home’s premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 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.
What inspectors found, June 2017
Neat Marsh House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an announced comprehensive inspection on 9 May 2017. The inspector met three people living at the home, spoke with staff and the manager, checked care plans, medicines, risk assessments, staff records and service records, and later spoke with three relatives.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines management, clean and well-maintained premises, trained staff and effective safeguarding arrangements.
Care was described as personal and respectful. People had detailed care plans, choices about daily life and activities, support with food and healthcare, and involvement from relatives. The home had remained Good since the previous inspection in May 2015.
Safe medicines and premises
Medicines, including controlled medicines, were managed safely. The building was clean, well maintained and subject to safety checks.
“Medicines were managed safely including controlled drugs Controlled drugs are medicines which require stricter legal controls to be applied to prevent them: being misused, being obtained illegally or causing harm.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans covered each person's personal care, social needs, physical health and communication. Staff were given clear information about how to support individual behaviours and preferences.
“Each person had a care plan for every aspect of their lives including their personal care, social needs and physical health.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
Inspectors saw warm interactions and found that staff respected people's privacy, dignity and choices. Relatives were involved in the life and care of their family members.
“Staff treated people with dignity and respect. They spoke with people in a respectful but friendly manner.” from the report
Activities and choice
People were supported to choose activities suited to their needs and interests, including outings, shopping, swimming, holidays and family events.
“People were supported on a one to one basis to take part in activities of their choice.” from the report
Checks and management
The home used audits, surveys, meetings and handovers to monitor care and gather views. Inspectors found the quality monitoring system effective.
“Our observations and findings on the day of our inspection confirmed that there was an effective quality monitoring system in place.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you maintain one-to-one support during the day, and how will staffing change when a person has an activity planned?
- 02How often will my relative's care plan and risk assessments be reviewed, and how will we be involved?
- 03How will you make sure medicines administration records remain accurate, including for controlled medicines?
- 04Which activities and outings could be offered to my relative, and how would you adapt them if they found noise or busy places difficult?
- 05How will the home keep us informed and respond if we want to make a complaint or raise a concern?
This was an announced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, with the previous overall rating of Good from May 2015 reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 June 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 Neat Marsh House
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 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
16 live-in carers within about an hour of East Riding of Yorkshire
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 £1,030 to £1,420 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
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.