CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Ottley House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, November 2023
Ottley House was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe and person-centred care, with a fire-door problem dealt with during the visit.
This was an unannounced inspection on 10 October 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicine records, recruitment files and health and safety records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people’s health needs were monitored, medicines were managed safely, staffing was sufficient and people were treated with kindness and dignity.
The home had a positive culture and strong systems for checking care and learning from incidents. Inspectors did find an issue with some fire doors closing when the fire alarm sounded, but the manager acted immediately and produced an action plan.
Person-centred care
Care was tailored to people’s needs and preferences. People and relatives were encouraged to help shape care plans.
“People received person centred care and their health needs were assessed and well monitored.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
Inspectors saw staff respond kindly when someone became distressed. People said their privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
“People were treated with kindness and their dignity respected.” from the report
Good health support
Health needs were monitored, tests were completed when needed and staff worked with specialist health professionals.
“The staff team worked with external health professionals such as the diabetic nurses and community psychiatric nurses to ensure people could continue to access specialist health support.” from the report
Learning culture
The home reviewed accidents and episodes of care, updated care plans and shared learning with staff.
“The provider had created an exceptional learning culture at the service which continuously improved the care people received.” from the report
Fire doors
needs fixingWhen the fire alarm sounded, inspectors found that some fire doors did not close properly. The manager acted immediately, arranged an assessment and produced an action plan.
“During the inspection the fire alarm sounded, and we observed an issue with the closing of some of the fire doors.” from the report
- 01Has the action plan for the fire doors been completed, and how are the doors checked now?
- 02How will staff make sure care plans continue to reflect each person’s changing health needs?
- 03How are relatives involved in six-monthly care plan reviews?
- 04What activities are currently available for someone’s individual interests and relationships?
- 05How can a resident or relative raise a concern, and how will the response be recorded?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, and both the care provided and the premises were looked at. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 November 2023 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 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection prevention and control arrangements during the Covid-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 30 March 2021. It focused only on infection prevention and control in the home, as part of the CQC's response to the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found clear safety steps for visitors, including hand sanitising, face masks, rapid Covid-19 testing and temperature checks. A visiting pod, changed furniture layouts and an extra staff room helped people and staff maintain social distance.
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, provided testing, managed admissions and outbreaks, and kept its infection control policy up to date. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Visitor safety
Visitors followed clear infection control steps, including testing and temperature checks, before entering.
“On arrival at the home there were clear instructions for all visitors to follow.” from the report
Safer family visits
The home used a visiting pod to help people stay in contact with important people while reducing cross-infection risk.
“Use of the area meant visits took place safely which reduced the risk of cross infection.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff used personal protective equipment properly and could access extra supplies.
“Staff used personal protection equipment appropriately and had access to additional supplies if needed.” from the report
Infection control monitoring
The home monitored whether staff followed its infection control policy.
“The registered manager and infection prevention lead monitored staff compliance with the provider's infection control policy.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently tested and supported to follow infection prevention measures?
- 02Is the visiting pod still available, and how can relatives arrange visits?
- 03How do you monitor staff compliance with the infection prevention and control policy?
- 04How do you manage new admissions and any infection outbreaks?
- 05What were the home's most recent ratings for caring, effectiveness, responsiveness and leadership, since this inspection did not assess them?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; 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 17 April 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.
Every inspection of Ottley House
5 rated inspections over 9 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- November 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2014InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 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
57 live-in carers within about an hour of Shropshire
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 £960 to £1,230 a week. 52 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
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.