CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Red Court Care Home & The Grove Care Home - Pudsey
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines arrangements overall and good infection control, but noted some incomplete medicines records and one falls plan needing an update.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. The report nevertheless records kind and respectful interactions observed during the visit.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor and improve the service. Relatives and staff said the home was well managed and approachable.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Red Court Care Home & The Grove Care Home - Pudsey was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and effective management, with some records needing improvement.
The inspection took place over several dates in October 2020. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and a health professional. They observed care, checked medicines and reviewed care, staffing and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. People were described as safe and treated with kindness and compassion. There were enough staff overall, medicines were mostly managed safely, and the buildings were clean and well maintained.
Inspectors found some minor problems. One falls risk plan needed updating, some medicines records were incomplete, and one staff file did not contain a reference from the last employer. The registered manager took action during the inspection.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only. The other three ratings were not inspected and were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe and well cared for. Staff were trained to recognise and report abuse.
“People felt safe and were treated with kindness and compassion.” from the report
Kind care
Inspectors saw positive and kind staff interactions. A health professional said care was tailored to people's needs and responded to changes in their health.
“The care given to residents is individual to their needs and responsive to any health decline.” from the report
Clean and maintained home
The premises were clean and well maintained. Infection control procedures had been updated during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“The premises were very clean and well maintained.” from the report
Good management oversight
The management team used audits and feedback to identify issues and make improvements. Staff said communication and teamwork were effective.
“Audits and monitoring procedures were used effectively to monitor the service and to make improvements.” from the report
Falls risk plan
needs fixingOne person's falls prevention and safe mobility plan needed updating. The registered manager acted immediately to address this.
“However, one person's risk management plan relating to falls prevention and safe mobility needed updating.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingRecords did not always show when thickeners had been used, and information was sometimes missing about people's medicine preferences. The manager took action during the inspection.
“However, medicines related records were not always completed.” from the report
Occasional waits for help
needs fixingMost people felt staffing was adequate, but some said they sometimes had to wait for support when the home was short staffed.
“Others said there were occasional times they had to wait for support if the home was short staffed.” from the report
Recruitment record
minorOne staff file did not show that a reference had been obtained from the person's last employer. The manager said this was an error and took steps to correct it.
“One staff member's records indicated the registered manager had not followed their policy of gaining a reference from the last employer.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to the falls prevention and safe mobility plan, and how are these plans checked now?
- 02How do you make sure thickeners and people's medicine preferences are recorded every time?
- 03How often are there not enough staff, and how do you prevent people waiting for support?
- 04What infection control arrangements remain in place, including PPE, testing and visitor arrangements?
- 05How are people and relatives involved in activities and in giving feedback about the service?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 December 2020 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, January 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with only a small record-keeping shortfall.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 24 November 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They also checked care records, medicines, recruitment files, training records and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments, safe medicines systems and staff who understood people's needs.
People and relatives consistently described kind, respectful care. Inspectors saw warm interactions, personalised care, activities and support with food, drinks and healthcare. The home had a registered manager and systems for checking quality and learning from incidents.
The ratings remained Good from the previous inspection in October 2015. The Grove was not open to admissions at the time, although some frailer people were being cared for there while repair work took place at Red Court.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives consistently described staff as kind, caring and respectful. Inspectors also observed warm and reassuring interactions.
“Without exception, all of the people we spoke with told us they were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.” from the report
Staff understood people
Inspectors found that staff knew people's needs and preferences well. Care plans included details such as preferred routines, independence and carer gender.
“Staff were friendly and warm towards people and understood their needs well.” from the report
Safe care arrangements
The home had risk assessments, safety checks, safeguarding training and safe medicines procedures. Inspectors found the medicines records and stock checked were accurate.
“People's medicines were administered safely. People received their medicines as prescribed and according to their individual preferences.” from the report
Good activities and personal care
People could choose from activities and social opportunities, including hobbies and music and movement. Care plans reflected individual choices and routines.
“Activities were designed to promote people's wellbeing and enable them to be engaged and to live as full a life as possible.” from the report
Open leadership
The manager was visible and approachable, and staff felt supported. Regular audits and reviews were used to identify and address improvements.
“A range of quality assurance audits were in place.” from the report
Compliments were not logged
minorThe provider received compliments but had not recorded them. An action was in place to make sure this happened in future.
“For example, the home received a number of compliments but did not log these.” from the report
- 01How are people being cared for in The Grove while repair work is taking place at Red Court?
- 02What staffing levels will be in place if The Grove begins accepting admissions?
- 03How will you make sure compliments, complaints and other feedback are recorded and followed up?
- 04How are people's preferences, including routines and preferred carer gender, recorded and kept up to date?
- 05How do you check that medicines continue to be given safely and that records remain accurate?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service covering all five CQC questions; The Grove was not open to admissions at the time, although some people were being cared for there. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 January 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 Red Court Care Home & The Grove Care Home - Pudsey
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Red Court Care Home & The Grove Care Home - Pudsey →
- January 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Red Court Care Home & The Grove Care Home - Pudsey →
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 November 2010.
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 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.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.