Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Raynel Drive

Goodpublished 8 January 2019, 7 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
Inspectors found effective safeguarding, risk assessment, staffing, recruitment, medicines management and health and safety checks. The home was clean and tidy, but some parts needed renovation.
Effective?
Good
Staff had induction, training, supervision and appraisal. The home supported people's health, nutrition, consent and communication needs, and made DoLS applications when required.
Caring?
Good
People described staff as kind and friendly. Inspectors observed positive interactions and found that privacy, dignity, choice and independence were respected.
Responsive?
Good
Assessments and person-centred care plans were completed and reviewed. People were offered choices about food and activities, including activities outside the local area, and complaints were managed.
Well-led?
Good
Managers were described as open and supportive. Audits, meetings, feedback and a customer involvement officer were used to monitor and improve the service.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, January 2019

Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, although the home needed some renovation and had no wheelchair access.

This was a comprehensive, announced inspection on 3 and 4 December 2018. The inspector spoke with people using the service, staff and managers. They reviewed care, medicines, staff records and quality checks, and observed care in two people's homes.

The home provides short break care for up to five people with learning disabilities. Four people were staying during the inspection. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines management, regular risk reviews and effective safeguarding arrangements.

People were treated kindly and supported to make choices and stay as independent as possible. Care plans included people's preferences, communication needs, health needs and activities. The home had systems for handling complaints and checking the quality of care.

The home was rated Good in all five areas and overall. This was unchanged from the previous inspection. Good means the inspectors found the service met the relevant standards at the time of this inspection, although it does not mean every aspect was perfect.

What inspectors praised
  • Keeping people safe

    The home had safeguarding procedures, suitable staffing and regular reviews of risks, accidents and incidents.

    “The provider had robust systems and procedures in place to keep people safe.” from the report
  • Kind and respectful care

    People were treated with kindness and their privacy, dignity, choices and independence were respected.

    “Staff were caring, kind and respected peoples wishes.” from the report
  • Quality oversight

    The provider used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor the service and make improvements.

    “The provider carried out audits to ensure quality assurance checks had been completed.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Some renovation was needed

    minor

    Inspectors found that parts of the home needed renovation. The manager said there was a service improvement plan.

    “However, we did observe that the home was in need of some renovations, for example, some wall paper had come away from the walls and the decoration was dated.” from the report
  • No wheelchair access

    needs fixing

    The property had no wheelchair access or adaptations at the time of inspection. Managers were discussing adaptations or a possible move to another property.

    “The registered manager told us the premises had not had any adaptations. For example, there was no access for wheelchairs.” from the report
  • Feedback was not service-specific

    minor

    The provider's surveys covered all its services rather than only this home. The manager supplied separate findings for people using this home.

    “Surveys had been carried out however, these were not specific to the respite service and reflected the views from people in all the providers services.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What renovations have been completed since the inspection, and what work remains?
  2. 02How would you support someone who uses a wheelchair, given that the property had no wheelchair access?
  3. 03What specialist equipment or adaptations could be provided if a person's needs changed?
  4. 04How do you collect and act on feedback specifically from people using this respite service?
  5. 05How would you tailor staffing levels if a person needed one-to-one support during their stay?

This was a comprehensive inspection covering the care, accommodation and all five CQC questions, and the ratings in every area remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Raynel Drive

2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. January 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Raynel Drive →

  2. June 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. August 2015

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 August 2015.

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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leeds

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 £1,250 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.

“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
Claire A., about Carla M.
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
Jasmine A., about Joseph M.
See live-in carers near LeedsProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.