CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Orchard House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm, with suitable recruitment, safeguarding training, risk assessments and safety checks. Staff appeared scarce at times during lunch, and the manager said staff deployment would be monitored.
- Effective?
- Good
- People generally received effective care, with assessed nutritional needs, specialist advice and access to health professionals. Inspectors found that prompting at lunchtime was not always timely, creating a risk that food became cold.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw kind and compassionate care. People were treated with dignity and respect, involved in decisions and encouraged to remain independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's personalities, preferences and interests, and activities were available. It was not always recorded that people or their representatives had been involved in care planning.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and provider had organised records, quality checks and a focus on improvement. Feedback was sought and action was taken, including plans linked to refurbishment and natural light.
What inspectors found, April 2019
Orchard House Care Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care, but the mealtime experience and some records needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 06 February 2019. Two inspectors and an expert by experience spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and a visiting professional. They checked care plans, recruitment files, and records about quality and safety.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives generally said they were happy with the care. Inspectors saw kind interactions, respectful care, person-centred plans, suitable activities and good systems for checking quality and safety.
There were some shortfalls. Staff seemed less available at times during lunch, and some people were not prompted with food quickly enough. The mealtime atmosphere was not very social. Some cream application records lacked detail, and it was not always recorded that people or their representatives had helped plan care. The manager said these issues would be addressed, and the cream records were updated during the inspection.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw many kind interactions. People were treated with dignity, involved in decisions and supported to do things for themselves.
“We saw numerous examples of kind and compassionate care.” from the report
Safe systems
The home had checks on its premises and equipment, safeguarding procedures and staff recruitment checks. Risks such as falls and skin damage were assessed.
“Safety checks on the premises and equipment were carried out.” from the report
Activities and personal care
Care plans considered people's interests and preferences. A range of activities was available, with support from activities coordinators.
“A variety of activities were available and people were supported by activities coordinators.” from the report
Organised leadership
The manager had clear oversight of the service. Records were organised, audits were completed and the home worked with health and social care professionals.
“Information we requested was easy to locate, neat, organised, and up to date.” from the report
Mealtimes
needs fixingSome people needed prompting with meals, but this was not always done promptly. Inspectors also found that lunch lacked a social atmosphere and staff appeared focused on tasks.
“Some people required regular prompting with their meals and this did not always happen in a timely manner meaning there as a risk their food became cold.” from the report
Staff availability at lunch
needs fixingStaff numbers were suitable during the inspection overall, but staff appeared scarce at times during lunch. The manager said staff deployment would be monitored.
“At times they appeared scarce such as during lunch.” from the report
Care planning records
needs fixingCare plans were person centred, but the records did not always show that people or their representatives had been involved in planning care.
“It was not always recorded that people or their representatives had been involved in care planning.” from the report
Cream application records
minorSome records about applying creams and lotions lacked detail. The home updated them immediately with precise instructions.
“Some records for the application of creams and lotions lacked detail.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to staffing arrangements during lunch since the inspection?
- 02How do you make sure people receive timely prompting and support with meals?
- 03How do you record people's and relatives' involvement in care planning?
- 04How are cream and lotion application records checked for clear instructions?
- 05How has the change from providing nursing care affected the support available to residents?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering the home, the care provided and all five CQC questions; the previous rating was Good, published in July 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 April 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.
Every inspection of Orchard House Care Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 February 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of 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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“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.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.