CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Pershore Short Term Breaks
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found detailed risk assessments, safe medicines systems, suitable recruitment checks and enough staff to meet people's needs. One epilepsy management plan was out of date, and the manager said records would be reviewed.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant induction, training and supervision. People received support with health, nutrition and specialist needs, although some DoLS applications were not tailored to individual circumstances.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with dignity and respect. Communication was adapted to each person, and families were involved in care planning and reviews.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected individual needs, preferences and communication styles. People were supported with activities, outings and complaints processes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had systems to monitor care records, medicines, risks and incidents. Staff and relatives felt supported and were encouraged to give feedback.
What inspectors found, August 2018
Pershore Short Term Breaks was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records needing improvement.
This was a comprehensive, announced inspection on 12 July 2018. One inspector spoke with relatives, staff and managers, observed interactions, and checked care plans, medicines records and quality checks.
The home supported people with learning disabilities, sensory impairments and complex health needs for short breaks. Inspectors found enough skilled staff, safe medicines practices, suitable training and good links with health professionals.
People were treated with dignity and respect. Care plans were detailed and personalised, and relatives were involved. Staff supported communication, choices, activities and access to the local community.
The overall rating was Good, and all five areas were rated Good. This was unchanged from the previous inspection in December 2015. Inspectors did identify an out-of-date epilepsy plan and DoLS records that were not individually tailored.
Skilled staff
Staff had induction, training and supervision, including specialist training for epilepsy and tube feeding. Inspectors found there were enough staff to provide safe care.
“There were enough skilled and knowledgeable staff to meet people's needs and provide effective care.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans and communication profiles were tailored to each person. Staff understood non-verbal communication and involved families in reviews.
“There were individualised care plans and risk assessments that contained information to staff on how to meet the person's needs effectively and safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Relatives spoke positively about staff's approach. Inspectors found that people were treated as individuals, with privacy and dignity respected.
“At this inspection, we found people continued to receive care that was kind and treated them with dignity and respect.” from the report
Good oversight
Managers checked care plans, risk assessments, daily records and medicines records. Actions were taken when errors or improvements were identified.
“There were governance systems in place which enabled the management team to have oversight and monitoring of areas such as daily records, care plans, risk assessments and medicine records.” from the report
Out-of-date epilepsy plan
seriousOne epilepsy management plan was not current. Staff were expected to call an ambulance during a prolonged seizure because the instructions for emergency medicine were out of date.
“we found one epilepsy management plan that was out of date.” from the report
DoLS records not individualised
needs fixingDoLS applications had been written in the same way for every person. Inspectors said records should reflect individual restrictions and be reviewed regularly.
“We found that although DoLS applications were recorded in people's records, they were written exactly the same for every person.” from the report
Staff vacancies
needs fixingThe home had staff vacancies and sometimes used agency staff. It temporarily reduced the number of available places from four to three so shifts remained adequately staffed.
“The registered manager told us there were a number of staff vacancies and this had meant at times using agency staff to help cover some shifts.” from the report
- 01Has the epilepsy management plan been updated, and what instructions would staff follow during a prolonged seizure?
- 02Have each person's DoLS records been rewritten to describe their own restrictions and reviewed regularly?
- 03How are staffing vacancies being addressed, and is the service still operating below its four-person capacity?
- 04How do you check that agency staff understand each person's care plan, risks and communication needs?
- 05How are relatives involved in reviewing care plans and giving feedback about short breaks?
This was a comprehensive inspection of the premises and care, covering all five rating areas; inspectors reviewed three people's care plans and records and spoke with four relatives. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 August 2018 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 Pershore Short Term Breaks
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Worcestershire
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 £980 to £1,260 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“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.