CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Norfolk Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safeguarding systems, risk assessments and secure medicines arrangements. They also found clean communal areas and infection control measures.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had induction, training, supervision and appraisals. People were supported with eating, cooking, health appointments and social care services. Some bungalows had low water pressure and no hot water, with contingency plans in place.
- Caring?
- Good
- People said staff were understanding, patient and respectful. Inspectors saw that privacy and dignity were respected and that people were supported to remain as independent as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records included people's health, treatment, cultural and personal needs, and were reviewed with them every three months. The home offered activities, social opportunities and ways to raise complaints or feedback.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a registered manager, regular meetings and quality checks. Inspectors found effective systems for monitoring and improving the service, although some policies were due for review.
What inspectors found, December 2018
Norfolk Road was rated Good; inspectors found safe, respectful and well-organised care, with some problems with hot water and policies needing review.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 19 November 2018. Inspectors spoke with six people living at the home, four staff members and the manager. They reviewed four people's care records, five staff files and other management records, and looked around all four bungalows.
Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment and suitable systems for safeguarding, medicines and risk assessments. People received support with food, health appointments and daily living. Staff had training, supervision and appraisals.
People said staff were kind, patient and respectful. Care plans were person-centred and reviewed regularly. There were activities, meetings and ways to make complaints or suggestions. The home had effective checks on quality, safety and maintenance.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection in March 2016. The report found no serious risks or concerns.
Enough staff
Inspectors found there were enough staff to meet people's care and support needs promptly. Recruitment checks included references, identity checks and DBS checks.
“People and staff told us there were enough staff employed to meet people's care and support needs in a timely way.” from the report
Skilled and supported staff
Staff received induction, relevant training, regular supervision and annual appraisals. Some staff had also completed extra training about supporting people with personality disorders.
“Staff received appropriate training and support they needed to undertake their jobs effectively.” from the report
Respectful care
People's privacy and dignity were respected. Staff knew people's preferences and supported them to do things for themselves.
“We saw people were treated with dignity and their privacy was respected.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records covered people's current needs, aspirations and recovery goals. Reviews were carried out with people regularly.
“People's care records were person centred and regularly reviewed.” from the report
Hot water and water pressure
needs fixingSome bungalows had low water pressure and no hot water at the time of the inspection. The manager had contingency plans and had escalated the issue, but families should check that it has been resolved.
“We did find some of the bungalows were experiencing problems with low water pressure and no hot water.” from the report
Policies due for review
minorSome policies and procedures were overdue for review. The manager had asked the provider's quality team to update them.
“Some were due for review and the registered manager had requested their quality team to do this.” from the report
- 01Have the problems with low water pressure and no hot water in some bungalows now been fully resolved?
- 02What arrangements are in place if hot water or water pressure problems happen again?
- 03Which policies were due for review, and have they now been reviewed and updated?
- 04How do staff make sure information stays accurate while paper and electronic care records are both being used?
- 05How are medicines risk assessments and medicines administration records checked for people who manage or need support with their medicines?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions and the overall quality and safety of the home; the overall Good rating continued from the 21 March 2016 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 December 2018 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 Norfolk Road
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 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
90 live-in carers within about an hour of Sheffield
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 £1,270 a week. 76 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
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.