CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Overndale House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found comprehensive risk assessments, enough staff, safe recruitment and suitable infection-control arrangements. Medicines were administered by trained staff, although some recording errors were identified and corrected.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open, person-centred culture, regular audits and good partnership working with health and social care professionals.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care and strong management, with a medicines-recording error corrected during the visit.
This was an unannounced inspection on 2 February 2023. One inspector spoke with people, staff and managers, and checked care, medicines, recruitment, maintenance and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk assessments, safe recruitment, clean premises and safe medicines administration. They also found that incidents were investigated and lessons were shared.
Staff were described as person-centred and supportive. Care plans contained detailed information about people's needs and preferences. Managers used audits and worked with health and social care professionals.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led. The overall Good rating stayed the same as at the previous inspection, published on 5 September 2017. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit and their previous ratings were used to calculate the overall rating.
Risk management
People had detailed risk assessments, including plans for self-harm and emotional distress. Staff knew people's triggers and how to support them safely.
“People had comprehensive risk assessments in place which explored their known risks.” from the report
Staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. People and staff also said staffing levels felt safe and consistent.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Person-centred support
Care plans explained people's preferences and backgrounds. Staff helped people settle into the home, build life skills and work towards goals.
“There was a strong emphasis on helping people to build life skills and reach goals.” from the report
Management and teamwork
The home had regular audits, open communication and partnership working with health and social care professionals.
“There was clear evidence of collaborative working and effective communication with other professionals in health and social care.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingSome controlled-medicine records did not show the exact administration time, and an error was found in records for two people's liquid controlled medicines. Staff corrected the error during the inspection.
“On two occasions the staff had written 'N' for the time the medicines were administered.” from the report
- 01What checks are now made to ensure controlled-medicine records show the exact time each medicine was given?
- 02How would you manage my relative's known risks, including any risk of self-harm or emotional distress?
- 03How would you involve my relative in decisions about their care and obtain their consent?
- 04What current activities and support would help my relative build life skills and reach personal goals?
- 05How would you keep the family informed and support contact, while respecting my relative's consent?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over into the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 February 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, September 2017
Overndale House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no major shortfalls identified.
This was a comprehensive, announced inspection on 23 July 2017. One inspector spoke with three people, a visitor, two staff members and the manager. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, daily records, training, supervision and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk plans, accurate medicines records, trained staff and access to health professionals.
Inspectors found positive relationships between staff and people. Care was tailored to people's needs and choices. People were supported with activities, independence, family contact and cooking. The home had been rated Good at the previous inspection and remained Good.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found staffing levels were enough to meet people's needs and support them safely.
“Staffing numbers were sufficient to meet people's needs and this ensured people were supported safely.” from the report
Personalised support
Care was based on what mattered to each person and supported their choices, goals and independence.
“People received good care that was personal to them and staff assisted them with the things they made the choices to do.” from the report
Kind relationships
Staff knew people's preferences and encouraged them to do things for themselves while offering help when needed.
“Our observations showed that good relationships had been established between staff and the people they provided care for.” from the report
Health and daily living
People had access to health professionals and were supported to develop cooking skills and make choices about meals.
“People were supported to maintain good health and had access to external health care professionals when required.” from the report
People's views
People were involved in decisions about activities, goals, food, medicines and the running of the home.
“Regular house meetings were held to seek people's views on the service and their thoughts on issues such as house maintenance, medication and the food.” from the report
No registered manager in post
minorThere was no registered manager at the time of the inspection. The current manager had submitted an application for consideration by the CQC, so families may want to check its outcome.
“At the time of our inspection there was no registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01What is the current outcome of the manager's registered manager application?
- 02How often will my relative's care plan and risk assessments be reviewed, and how will they be involved?
- 03How will my relative be supported if they want to manage some of their own medicines?
- 04Which activities and independence goals could my relative work towards here?
- 05How will the home support my relative to keep in contact with family and access health professionals?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five areas, and the previous Good rating remained unchanged. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 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 Overndale House
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 October 2013.
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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Bristol, City of
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 £1,020 to £1,300 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She became a good friend to my mother in law, chatting with her, dancing with her, knitting with her and the list goes on”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.