CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 18 Bisley Drive
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines systems and appropriate infection control. The safety rating remained Good.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit, so no new rating was given.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit, so no new rating was given.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit, so no new rating was given.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- Inspectors found exceptional leadership, a strong improvement system, meaningful involvement of people and relatives, and very good partnership working. The rating improved from Good at the previous inspection.
What inspectors found, June 2023
Real Life Options - 18 Bisley Drive rated Good; inspectors found safe care and exceptionally strong leadership.
This was an unannounced inspection. Inspectors visited on 11 April 2023 and reviewed information through 26 April 2023. They spoke with people using the service, relatives, staff and health and social care professionals. They also observed care.
The home provides short-term respite care for up to seven people with a learning disability or autism. Four people were using the home during the inspection. Inspectors found good safety arrangements, including suitable staffing, risk assessments, safe medicines systems and infection control.
The home was rated Outstanding for being well-led. Inspectors found strong leadership, person-centred support, good communication and effective work with other professionals. The overall rating stayed Good. Safe stayed Good, while well-led improved from Good at the previous inspection in 2017. The other three areas were not inspected at this visit and carried forward their earlier ratings.
Person-centred support
Support was tailored to each person. Staff promoted independence, respected choices and supported people to take part in activities they enjoyed.
“Care was completely centred and tailored to each individual.” from the report
Staffing and safety
Inspectors found enough staff, effective staff deployment and suitable checks for new workers. Risks, accidents and medicines were monitored.
“Staffing capacity was sufficient and staff deployment was effective to ensure people's needs were met in a safe, timely and consistent way.” from the report
Leadership
The home had approachable managers, a positive culture and strong systems for checking quality and making improvements.
“There was a very strong and effective governance system in place.” from the report
Independence and community life
People were supported to build confidence, develop daily living skills and take part in activities in the wider community.
“People were encouraged and supported to lead as fulfilled a life as possible.” from the report
Partnership working
The home worked closely with other professionals and organisations to support people's needs and quality of life.
“The registered manager and management team had grown their networks with partnership agencies and charities, they worked in an extremely collaborative way.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and manage my relative's individual risks before and during a respite stay?
- 02How would you support my relative to make choices if they communicate without speaking?
- 03How would you check and administer my relative's medicines, including any changes before the stay?
- 04What activities and community outings could be provided to match my relative's interests and wishes?
- 05How would you keep me informed about my relative's care and any changes during the stay?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; the other three key-question ratings were not inspected at this visit and carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 June 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, April 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 16 February 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and the effect of COVID-19 staffing pressures.
The home had systems for testing visitors, checking vaccination evidence, using protective equipment and following government guidance. Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed in the areas they checked.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not provide an overall quality rating or a full assessment of all areas of care.
Staff understood infection procedures
Staff could explain the guidance for visitors and how to use protective equipment safely.
“Staff were confident and knowledgeable about government guidance and what visitors were required to do prior to entering the service.” from the report
Protective equipment was available
The home had protective equipment stations and staff knew how to put equipment on and remove it safely.
“PPE was available throughout the home and there were designated PPE stations.” from the report
Checks were in place
The management team checked whether staff were following infection prevention and control processes.
“The management team had effective systems in place to check that safe infection prevention and control processes were being followed by staff.” from the report
People could keep in contact with relatives
People were supported to leave the home to visit relatives or use the local community, with risk assessments in place.
“People were encouraged to leave the service to visit relatives or access the local community.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you check that staff continue to use protective equipment correctly?
- 02How are visitors tested and checked before entering the home?
- 03How do you assess and manage infection risks when people leave the home to visit relatives or use the local community?
- 04What measures are in place if COVID-19 causes staffing pressures?
- 05How do you keep the infection prevention and control policy up to date?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 April 2022 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 18 Bisley Drive
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- April 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 April 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 Tyneside
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 £950 to £1,140 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.