CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 2 Frederick Street
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable infection control and good management of risks and incidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward to calculate the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers were visible and approachable, understood people's needs and used feedback to develop the service. Staff were committed to reviewing support as people's needs and wishes changed.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Real Life Options - 2 Frederick Street is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and strong management.
The inspection took place without notice on 7 and 8 February 2023. One inspector, a pharmacist specialist and an Expert by Experience visited the home. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and well-led were both rated Good. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines management, suitable infection control and care records that reflected people's risks and needs.
This was not a full inspection of all five areas. The report says the other ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection, which was published in February 2018. The home supported three people with learning disabilities at the time of this inspection.
Individual choice
Staff supported people to make choices, stay independent and take part in activities in the local area.
“Staff supported people to have the maximum possible choice, control and independence be independent and they had control over their own lives.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines records, guidance, staff training and audits were in place. Inspectors also found that medicines were not being used excessively to control behaviour.
“Medicines administration records and guidance for staff to ensure medicines could be given safely were in place and reflected people's preferences.” from the report
Enough staff
Staffing levels and skills matched people's needs, including support for activities and visits.
“The provider ensured the service had enough staff. This included enough for one-to-one support for people to take part in activities and visits how and when they wanted.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that staff understood people's individual needs and protected their privacy and dignity.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Open management
Managers were approachable, listened to families and acted on feedback. The service also worked with health, social care and advocacy organisations.
“The provider sought feedback from people and those important to them and used the feedback to develop the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you support my relative to make choices, remain independent and take part in activities they enjoy?
- 02How often will my relative's medicines be reviewed, and how do you check that medicines are not being used to control behaviour inappropriately?
- 03How will you keep my relative's care records accurate and up to date as their needs change?
- 04What one-to-one staffing will be available for visits, shopping and other activities?
- 05How will you support my relative's communication needs and involve family members in care reviews?
This was an unannounced inspection focused on Safe and Well-led; the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 February 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, February 2018
Real Life Options - 2 Frederick Street is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements recommended for fire drills and staff training.
The inspection was announced. An inspector visited the home on 31 January 2018 and spoke with a relative by telephone on 2 February. The home supported three people, who could not communicate verbally, so inspectors observed care and staff interactions. They also reviewed care plans, staff files and medicines management.
Inspectors found all five areas were Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. They found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, suitable risk assessments and good support from health professionals.
Staff knew people well and supported their choices, routines and communication needs. Care plans were detailed and personalised. The home had systems to monitor quality and respond to problems.
The home remained Good, the same rating as at the previous inspection in December 2015. Inspectors recommended a night worker practise an evacuation alone and that all staff receive equality and diversity training.
Kind, familiar care
Staff had known the people living at the home for many years. Inspectors saw patient and caring interactions focused on what people wanted.
“Through observations we saw staff demonstrated an extremely patient and kind, caring manner.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans gave staff detailed guidance about people's preferences, histories, routines and support needs.
“Care plans contained detailed information about people's personal preferences and wishes as well as their life histories.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices and take part in everyday activities, rather than having things done automatically for them.
“Staff had a good understanding of the importance of promoting independence and maintaining people's skills.” from the report
Strong oversight
The home used audits, staff meetings, people's meetings and feedback to monitor care and identify improvements.
“Quality assurance audits were embedded to ensure a good level of quality was maintained.” from the report
Night-time evacuation practice
needs fixingInspectors recommended that the member of staff working alone at night practise an evacuation alone, to reflect night-time conditions. The manager had booked this for the morning after the inspection.
“However, we recommended that the staff member who works alone on a night simulates an evacuation on their own to emulate the night time circumstances .” from the report
Equality and diversity training
needs fixingMost staff had worked at the home for many years and had not received equality and diversity training. The manager arranged this training during the inspection.
“We recommended all staff receive training in equality and diversity and the registered manager arranged for this to take place during the inspection day.” from the report
- 01Has the night worker completed the evacuation practice recommended by inspectors?
- 02Have all staff now completed equality and diversity training?
- 03How is night-time support provided when one care worker is working alone?
- 04How do staff check that people who cannot communicate verbally are happy with their food, activities and care?
- 05How are people's changing needs and preferences recorded in their care plans?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including observations of care, discussions with staff and a relative, and reviews of care plans, staff files and medicines management. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 February 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 2 Frederick Street
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 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
45 live-in carers within about an hour of Stockton-on-Tees
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 £1,190 a week. 40 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“I found Alison to be kind , caring helpful concencious... Alison has a heart of gold”
“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.