CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at OSJCT Digby Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about most infection-control measures, including PPE, testing, safe admissions and managing outbreaks. They were not fully assured about cleanliness in some areas and cleaning schedules.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2022
OSJCT Digby Court was inspected but not rated; infection-control arrangements were mostly assured, but cleanliness needed improvement.
Inspectors visited the home without warning on 22 February 2022. This was a targeted inspection during the COVID-19 pandemic. They looked mainly at infection prevention, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures.
The home supported visits from friends and family, with no limit on visitor numbers. Visitors had to book so staff could support visits and clean afterwards. The home also had systems for testing people, staff and visitors, and checked professional visitors' vaccination status.
Inspectors were assured about most infection-control measures, including personal protective equipment, testing, admissions, visiting arrangements and the management of outbreaks. However, they were not fully assured about cleanliness in a few areas and about cleaning schedules. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a full overall quality rating.
Family visiting
The home was supporting people to see friends and family, with no restriction on the number of visitors. Visits had to be booked so staff could support them safely and clean afterwards.
“The provider was supporting people to see their friends and family. There was no restriction on the number of visitors a person could have.” from the report
Testing and vaccination checks
The home had testing systems for people living there, staff and visitors. It also checked the vaccination status of professional visitors.
“Systems were in place to test people living at the home, staff and visitors. Professional visitors had their vaccination status checked.” from the report
Infection-control measures
Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, supported testing, managed admissions safely and had arrangements to prevent or manage outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Cleanliness and cleaning records
needs fixingInspectors found issues in a few areas of the home and with cleaning schedules. The manager said they knew about these areas and were working with staff to improve them.
“We were not fully assured that the provider maintaining cleanliness in the home.” from the report
- 01Which areas of the home had cleanliness problems, and what has been done to put them right?
- 02How are cleaning schedules now checked and signed off?
- 03How are visits booked and supported, and how is cleaning carried out between visits?
- 04How are people, staff and visitors tested when needed?
- 05How does the home manage staffing pressures linked to COVID-19?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 March 2022 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, April 2019
Rated Good in every area; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with clear improvement since the previous Requires Improvement rating.
This was an unannounced inspection over 29 and 30 January 2019. One inspector and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and a visiting health professional. They reviewed care records, staff files, medicines, complaints, accidents, audits and safety documents.
The inspectors found people were safe, staff were suitably trained and there were enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were managed safely. The home was clean. People received nutritious food and support with their health needs.
People described staff as kind and caring. Care plans recorded people's wishes, preferences and communication needs. People were involved in decisions about their care and knew how to complain. The home had strong leadership and systems to monitor quality.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection, published on 17 October 2017, had rated the home Requires Improvement. Inspectors said the home had improved since then.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw medicines being administered by trained and competent staff. Safety checks and risk assessments were in place.
“People had their medicines administered safely by competent and experienced staff.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors observed friendly, courteous and attentive interactions, with people offered choices and treated with dignity.
“During the inspection we consistently observed friendly, kind staff who interacted with people well.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans contained detailed information about people's needs, preferences, communication and life history. People were involved in creating and reviewing their plans.
“Care plans were person centred and were comprehensively detailed about people's needs and wishes which meant that staff provided care in the way that people wanted it.” from the report
Improved leadership
The management team used audits, feedback and action plans to identify and address problems. Inspectors found clear improvement since the previous inspection.
“Evidence we saw confirmed that the registered provider had improved since the last inspection on 17 October 2017.” from the report
Home comforts feedback
needs fixingThe latest survey was positive in most areas, but feedback about home comforts was lower than average. The provider had an improvement plan, so families should ask what has been done and whether people are now satisfied.
“Feedback for most areas was positive, however feedback related to 'home comforts' was lower than average.” from the report
- 01What actions were taken after feedback about home comforts was lower than average, and what do residents say about this now?
- 02What is the current response time for call bells, particularly at night?
- 03How often are my relative's care plan and risk assessments reviewed and updated?
- 04What activities are currently available for someone with my relative's interests, including opportunities outside the home?
- 05How are medicines checked today, and how is staff competency kept up to date?
This was an unannounced inspection of the whole care home, covering all five CQC questions and both the accommodation and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 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 OSJCT Digby Court
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 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.