CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Penhayes House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were managed without unnecessarily restricting people’s freedom. Medicines, recruitment checks, staffing and safeguarding arrangements were also found to be safe.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training and supervision, and people were supported with health appointments, nutrition and decision-making. Inspectors found the home was working within the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff knew people well and treated them with kindness and respect. People’s privacy, dignity, independence and choices were promoted.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans gave detailed information about people’s needs and preferences. People were supported with communication, activities, relationships and access to the community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found strong leadership, an open culture and effective checks on care quality, incidents, staff training and the environment.
What inspectors found, January 2019
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with strong leadership.
This was an unannounced inspection on 12 December 2018. It was the home’s first inspection since registering. Inspectors reviewed records, observed care and spoke with people, relatives, an advocate, staff and health professionals.
The home supported up to four people with autism and/or a learning disability and complex needs. Inspectors found that people were safe, medicines were managed properly, staffing was sufficient and staff had suitable checks, training and support.
Care was personalised. Staff supported people to make choices, stay independent, communicate in ways that suited them and take part in activities in the home and community. The home also worked with health professionals and families.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The report records no breaches, enforcement action or areas rated below Good.
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people’s individual needs, preferences and routines. Staff used their knowledge of people’s histories to support their choices and independence.
“Care plans were person centred and contained the relevant information staff needed to ensure people's needs were met.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Medicines were administered, recorded and stored safely. Inspectors also found enough suitably checked staff to meet people’s needs.
“Medicines were administered, recorded and stored in a safe manner and all staff who administered medicines had received suitable training to do this.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff built positive relationships with people and respected their privacy, dignity and need for independence.
“People were at the heart of the service's culture and were supported by staff that respected and promoted their independence, privacy and dignity” from the report
Activities and community life
People were supported to take part in varied activities and to access places and activities in the local community.
“A full range of stimulating and varied activities were on offer and people had links with the community.” from the report
Open leadership
The home had systems for staff support, feedback, learning from incidents and checking the quality of care.
“There was a strong emphasis on continuous improvement to drive up the quality of service provided at the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and support my relative’s individual needs before they move in?
- 02How would you support my relative’s communication needs and preferred way of communicating?
- 03How do you use positive risk-taking while keeping my relative safe?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative?
- 05How would you support my relative if they needed end of life care?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering the home’s premises and care, with ratings given for all five key questions; no end of life care was being provided at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 January 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 Penhayes House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- January 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 April 2018.
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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.