CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Penleigh House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, clear risk assessments, safe recruitment and safe medicines arrangements. The home was clean and infection control training was in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before they moved in, and staff had relevant training and support. Healthcare professionals were involved, meals offered choices, and mental capacity safeguards were followed.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were attentive, respectful and knew people well. People were supported to make choices, maintain privacy and develop independence.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care was tailored to individual needs and communication methods. People were supported to enjoy activities, use specialist facilities, visit the community and keep in touch with family and friends.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open and person-centred culture, with quality checks in place. Staff felt valued and the management worked with families and other professionals.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding responsiveness and inspectors finding safe, kind and highly personalised care.
This was an unannounced inspection on 29 October 2019. One inspector observed how people were supported, spoke with the manager and five staff, reviewed care and medicines records, and spoke with a relative. The inspector also considered information from the local authority and health and social care professionals.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. It was rated Outstanding for Responsive. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines systems, personalised care, good healthcare support and a strong focus on people's choices, independence, family relationships and community life.
The home had invested in facilities including an activity hub, a hot tub with moving and handling equipment, and a relaxation area. The overall rating and all five question ratings were unchanged from the previous inspection, published in May 2017.
Personalised activities
People had access to a wide range of activities and facilities that supported enjoyment, independence, relaxation and physical wellbeing.
“People were supported to attend clubs, go on trips to places of interest, go out for meals and shopping.” from the report
Kind and attentive staff
Staff understood people's ways of communicating and responded to their preferences, comfort and emotions.
“Staff were extremely attentive to the people they were supporting.” from the report
Safe staffing
Staffing was planned flexibly, including extra support for appointments and use of the hot tub. The established team meant people were supported by staff they knew.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people's needs and to spend time with them doing the things they liked to do.” from the report
Good health support
The home worked with health and social care professionals and followed up recommendations. Staff also supported people with appointments and health checks.
“We always find the team and management very proactive and they are helpful and willing to listen.” from the report
Family and community links
People were helped to maintain family relationships and build friendships through regular community activities.
“People were protected from social isolation and were supported to access the local community on a regular basis and keep in contact with family and friends.” from the report
Accessible bathroom work delayed
minorOne bathroom had not yet been made more accessible because of planning consent delays. The report said the work was now going ahead.
“There had been some delays on making one of the bathrooms more accessible due to planning consent and this was now going ahead.” from the report
- 01What accessibility improvements have been completed in the bathroom, and are any further works planned?
- 02How would you support my relative to communicate choices if they cannot communicate verbally?
- 03How would you keep my relative's care plan updated as their needs and wishes change?
- 04Which activities, community visits and facilities would be suitable for my relative?
- 05How would you involve our family in healthcare appointments, reviews and decisions about care?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection that looked at the premises, care provided and all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 November 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.
What inspectors found, May 2017
Rated Good overall; inspectors found exceptionally responsive, kind care, with medicines recording and recruitment issues to keep under review.
The unannounced inspection took place on 4 April 2017. One inspector reviewed care and home records, spoke with staff and managers, observed people, and contacted relatives and health professionals.
The home supported 10 adults with learning disabilities, including people with profound physical disabilities who did not communicate verbally. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with dignity, and supported by staff who understood their needs.
The home was rated Good overall and Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. Responsive care was rated Outstanding because support was highly personalised and the home offered creative activities, trips and accessible facilities.
Personalised activities
People were supported to try different hobbies, visit places in the community and build independence. The home created its own activity facilities when local day centres closed.
“The service was flexible and responsive to people's individual needs and preferences, finding creative ways to enable people to live as full a life as possible.” from the report
Accessible facilities
The home had accessible outdoor areas, a sensory garden, a hot tub and an activity centre with equipment for cooking, computers and sensory experiences.
“These facilities were exceptional and promoted people's wellbeing.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well, understood their non-verbal communication and supported privacy, dignity and choice in daily care.
“People were treated in a dignified, caring manner, which demonstrated that their rights were protected.” from the report
Good health support
Staff noticed changes in people's health and worked with GPs and specialist professionals. Care records included guidance about people's medical needs and risks.
“Staff were proactive in recognising when a person was unwell and liaised with the GP and other health professionals.” from the report
Open management
Relatives and staff described the manager and provider as approachable and committed. Audits, surveys and action plans were used to check and improve the service.
“The provider actively sought and acted upon the views of others through creative and innovative methods.” from the report
Medicines preferences
minorPeople's preferred ways of taking medicines were not always written down. The report also said one person's medicine was being given with food and this needed review to protect their rights and check that food would not affect the medicine.
“It would be beneficial for this to be recorded to assist new staff.” from the report
Vacant staff post
minorThe home was recruiting to one vacant post and had received little interest. Inspectors found staffing levels were sufficient during the inspection, but this is worth checking if people's needs have changed.
“The registered manager told us they were actively recruiting to one vacant post.” from the report
Planned building work
minorA bathroom was due to be changed into a more accessible wet room, and a dedicated kitchen hand-washing facility was being addressed. Families may want to check whether this work was completed.
“There was a refurbishment plan in place, which included replacing the bathroom on the middle floor and replacing carpets on the stairs and hallway on the middle and top floor.” from the report
- 01How are each person's preferred ways of taking medicines recorded now, especially for new staff?
- 02What was the outcome of the review of the medicine given with food?
- 03Has the vacant staff post been filled, and how are staffing levels matched to people's current needs?
- 04Was the middle-floor bathroom refurbished as planned to make it more accessible?
- 05What activities and trips are available now, and how are they matched to each person's interests and communication needs?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 May 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 Penleigh House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- May 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 January 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of South Gloucestershire
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 £1,280 a week. 32 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“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.