CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Options Thorpe House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks, medicines, incidents and infection control were managed safely, although staffing levels had been under pressure.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received good support with their health, food, communication and independence. Inspectors found gaps in some training courses relevant to people's diagnoses and recommended that training be reviewed.
- Caring?
- Good
- Relatives and professionals described staff as kind and caring. People were supported to make choices, maintain dignity and develop independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and communication methods were adapted to each person. People were supported with activities and relationships, although the rating had fallen from Outstanding at the previous inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers understood their responsibilities and used monitoring systems to review quality. Inspectors found mixed views about communication with relatives and some quality audit actions were not recorded.
What inspectors found, November 2021
Options Thorpe House was rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but staffing, training and communication needed attention.
Inspectors visited on 20 September and 5 October 2021, with inspection activity continuing until 4 November. They spoke with people, staff, relatives and health professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines, incident records, training, recruitment and quality checks.
The home was judged safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. People had detailed care plans, support with communication and choices, and help to develop independence. Medicines, infection control and risk management were found to be safe.
There were concerns about low staffing levels, gaps in diagnosis-specific training, tired decoration and mixed communication with relatives. The overall rating remained Good, but effective and responsive changed from Outstanding at the previous inspection in 2017.
Person-centred care
Care plans recorded people's preferences, triggers and the support they needed. Staff knew people well and adapted care to their individual needs.
“People had person centred and detailed plans of care which provided staff with the information they needed to support them.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Relatives and professionals were consistently positive about staff's caring approach. People were treated with dignity and encouraged to be independent.
“Relatives and professionals were consistently positive about the caring attitude of the staff.” from the report
Communication support
The home used picture prompts, easy-read information, diagrams, letters and objects of reference to help people express themselves and make choices.
“The provider supported people to effectively communicate their needs, including those with conditions that impact how they converse and lead their lives.” from the report
Support with independence
People were helped to learn practical skills, take part in household tasks and access activities suited to their interests.
“People had been supported to increase their independence and learn new skills for example preparing food, drinks and recycling.” from the report
Safe medicines and infection control
Medicines were stored and given safely. Inspectors were assured that infection prevention measures, testing, protective equipment and visiting arrangements were in place.
“Medicines were safely stored and administered as prescribed.” from the report
Staffing pressure
needs fixingThe manager, staff, relatives and professionals reported low staffing levels and frequent staff changes. Staffing was at the agreed level during the inspection, but the effect of recent recruitment work was not yet clear.
“The organisation was experiencing pressure with current staffing levels, and recruitment.” from the report
Training gaps
needs fixingInspectors found gaps in training that was especially relevant to the people living in the home. They recommended making these courses a priority.
“We reviewed staff training and saw gaps in some courses most relevant to people living in the home, despite staff requesting this in staff training reviews.” from the report
Tired decoration
minorSome paintwork and plaster needed repair or decoration. The manager said redecorating the corridors was due to start.
“Some parts of the home looked tired and in need of repair/decoration.” from the report
Quality audit records
needs fixingInfection control audits did not always record all actions needed when problems were identified. This was raised with the manager.
“We reviewed a selection of Infection Prevention & Control audits for people's flats and kitchens and saw not all actions had been recorded when issues were noted.” from the report
Mixed family communication
minorRelatives gave different accounts of how well the home kept them informed. One concern was that updates about COVID-19 guidance and policies were not sent routinely.
“Communication with parents (or carers) could be improved a lot.” from the report
- 01How many staff are currently working at the home, and how do you cover shifts when staffing is low?
- 02Which training courses specific to residents' diagnoses are incomplete, and when will staff complete them?
- 03What work has been completed to repair and redecorate the tired areas of the home?
- 04How do you record and check that actions from infection prevention and control audits have been completed?
- 05How will relatives receive regular updates about policies, visiting arrangements and changes to care?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe; the previous inspection was published on 30 August 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 November 2021 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
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found exceptional, individualised support, with safe, kind care and strong management.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 21 June 2017. One inspector spoke with a person living at the home, relatives, staff and professionals. They reviewed care files, medicines, staff records, complaints, safety checks and quality records. They also observed care and looked around the home.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Effective and Responsive care were Outstanding. Safe, Caring and Well-led were Good. Inspectors found people were protected from harm, received their medicines safely and had their health, food and drink needs well supported.
Support was highly personal. People were helped to make choices, build independence, take part in activities and keep in touch with family and friends. The report says the home had improved from Good at the previous inspection in April 2015 to Outstanding overall.
Individual support
Support plans reflected people's needs closely and included positive approaches to help people become more independent and develop their skills.
“Person-centred support plans incorporated positive behaviour support strategies that were effectively used to promote people's independence and personal development.” from the report
Activities and choice
People were supported to choose how they spent their time, go out, learn life skills and take part in activities suited to them.
“Activities were extremely personalised and provided people with fulfilled lifestyles.” from the report
Family connections
Staff worked hard to help people see relatives and friends, including overcoming barriers linked to anxiety or difficult behaviour.
“Instructors did everything to remove any barriers to ensure people saw and met up with their family members.” from the report
Health and nutrition
People received strong support with meals, drinks, medical appointments and health action plans.
“People received excellent support with their nutrition and hydration to maintain their health and wellbeing.” from the report
Privacy and dignity
Staff took practical steps to protect people's privacy during personal care and when they were out in the community.
“Instructors knocked on bedrooms doors before entering and ensured bathroom doors were closed quickly if they had to enter and exit, so that people were never seen in an undignified state.” from the report
Survey results were still awaiting analysis
minorThe latest satisfaction survey had been completed, but its results had not been analysed by the inspection. This was a minor management shortfall rather than a reported safety concern.
“We saw that information gathered from the most recent survey responses (May 2017) had not yet been analysed.” from the report
- 01Have the May 2017 satisfaction survey results now been analysed, and what actions followed from them?
- 02How are support plans and positive behaviour support strategies reviewed when a person's needs or behaviour changes?
- 03How will you support my relative to maintain contact with family and take part in activities that match their interests?
- 04What training and supervision will the staff supporting my relative receive?
- 05How are medicines given as required recorded and reviewed?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 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 Options Thorpe House
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2021Goodcurrent ratingdown from OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 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
32 live-in carers within about an hour of North Lincolnshire
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 £1,300 a week. 29 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“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.”
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
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.