CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at OSJCT Boultham Park House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place. This included visitor controls, personal protective equipment, testing, cleaning, admissions and social distancing.
- Effective?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess or rate this question.
- Caring?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess or rate this question.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess or rate this question.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess or rate this question.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were safe and well managed.
Inspectors made an unannounced, targeted visit on 11 December 2020. They checked how the home was preventing and controlling coronavirus infections.
They found good arrangements for visitors, including hand washing, temperature checks, personal protective equipment and a planned safe visiting space. Staff had suitable protective equipment, training and access to testing.
The home had cleaning schedules, deep-cleaning and safe arrangements for admissions, isolation, social distancing and meals. Inspectors were assured about all the infection control areas they checked, but they did not give an overall quality rating.
Visitor safety
The home had a structured system for visitors, with hand washing, temperature checks and protective equipment. It had also built a separate visiting space for when visits restarted.
“The provider had built a safe visiting space for loved ones to use when visiting recommenced.” from the report
Protective equipment and testing
Staff had suitable protective equipment and knew when to change it. The home had registered for whole-home testing and tracked test results.
“Staff were knowledgeable on when to change PPE and had received further training from the provider.” from the report
Cleaning
The home used strict cleaning schedules, deep cleaning and decontamination of bedrooms, shared areas and frequently touched surfaces.
“Strict cleaning schedules were in place and appropriate decontamination processes were also in place.” from the report
Admissions and isolation
People were isolated for two weeks after admission or hospital discharge. Zoning and designated staff were used to support people who needed to isolate.
“The registered manager had an admissions process in place which minimised the risk of potential transmission of infection to people living at the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visits currently organised, and is the separate visiting space still being used?
- 02How often are residents and staff tested, and how are positive results managed?
- 03What isolation arrangements are used for someone newly admitted or returning from hospital?
- 04How often are bedrooms, communal areas and frequently touched surfaces deep cleaned?
- 05What support and risk assessments are currently available for staff concerned about infection risks?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only, so the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas of care were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 January 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, July 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some medicines records and protocols needing improvement.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 10 June 2019. They spoke with five people, four relatives, seven staff members and one visiting professional. They also reviewed care records, medicines records, recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and that staff were respectful. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, personalised care and good links with health professionals.
Inspectors found that some medicines were not administered or recorded in line with best practice. No harm was identified, and the manager addressed this immediately after receiving feedback. The report made a recommendation about medicines and 'as and when required' protocols.
Skilled and sufficient staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and found that recruitment checks had been completed. People and professionals felt staff had the right skills and training.
“People felt staff had the right skills to look after them.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were described as comfortable and well looked after. Staff communicated compassionately, respected people's dignity and supported independence.
“People were treated with compassion, dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people's preferences and interests. Care was planned, delivered and reviewed around individual needs.
“Staff were knowledgeable about people and had a good understanding of their preferences and interests; this enabled them to provide personalised care.” from the report
Open management
The home had systems for monitoring quality and involved people and relatives in discussions about care. Staff said they were listened to.
“The service was organised and well-run; people were treated with respect and in a professional manner.” from the report
Medicines administration and records
needs fixingSome medicines were not administered or recorded in line with best practice. The report says no harm was identified and that the manager addressed this immediately, but it recommended reviewing medicines guidance and protocols.
“Some medicines were not administered or recorded in line with best practice.” from the report
- 01What changes were made after the inspection to ensure medicines are administered and recorded in line with best practice?
- 02How do staff decide when to give 'as and when required' medicines, and where is this guidance recorded?
- 03How will you make sure my relative's care plan reflects their needs, preferences and interests?
- 04How are staffing levels checked when people's needs change?
- 05How can relatives raise concerns, give feedback or make a complaint?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that assessed all five CQC areas and looked at both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 July 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 OSJCT Boultham Park House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 November 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
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.