CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Reiver House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Staff understood safeguarding and individual risks. Medicines were managed safely, and risk assessments, swallowing plans and emergency evacuation plans were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and staff followed advice from health professionals. Staff had relevant training and support, and mental capacity and deprivation of liberty processes were up to date.
- Caring?
- Good
- People appeared relaxed and comfortable. Inspectors saw warmth, kindness, respect and encouragement, and found that staff understood people's individual communication.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans included people's needs, preferences, interests and communication methods. Activities were tailored to people's choices and changing needs were reviewed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Staff described supportive leadership and an open culture. Audits and action plans were used to monitor quality, although the new manager's registration was still being processed.
What inspectors found, September 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some damaged paintwork and a manager registration still being processed.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 23 August 2018. One inspector observed care, spoke with staff and managers, contacted health and social care professionals, and checked care records, medicines records, staff files, complaints and safety records.
The home supported three adults with autism and severe learning difficulties. Inspectors found that staff knew people well, understood their risks and communication methods, and supported them to take part in activities and community life. People appeared relaxed and comfortable, and were treated with kindness and respect.
The five areas inspected were all rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. The report says the Good rating continued from the previous inspection and that there was no evidence of serious risks or concerns.
The home did not have a registered manager at the time. An application for the newly appointed manager was being processed. Inspectors also noted chipped and damaged paintwork, although the manager said refurbishment was planned.
Staff knew people well
The small, stable staff team understood people's subtle communication cues, risks and preferences. This helped staff respond to needs and support people safely.
“Staff had a detailed knowledge of the people they cared for and were able to recognise subtle cues from people” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People appeared calm and comfortable with staff. Inspectors saw sensitive support, encouragement and positive relationships.
“We saw people were treated with kindness and respect.” from the report
Personalised support and activities
Care plans covered people's backgrounds, interests, likes and dislikes. Activities were based on individual ability, choice and lifestyle.
“The activities people were involved in were tailored to their ability, choice and lifestyle to encourage participation and reduce social isolation.” from the report
Good safety and medicines systems
Risk assessments, safe swallowing plans and medicines checks were in place. Incidents were reviewed so that action could be taken to reduce repeat risks.
“Medicines continued to be stored and managed safely.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff received induction, training linked to people's needs, regular supervision and appraisals.
“Staff received appropriate training for their role and they were supported to further develop their knowledge and skills.” from the report
Damaged paintwork
minorInspectors found chipped and damaged paintwork and said parts of the home needed refurbishment. The manager said redecoration was planned and quotes had been obtained.
“The home was visibly clean throughout however some parts of the home required some refurbishment as there was chipped and damaged paintwork visible.” from the report
Manager registration pending
needs fixingThere was no registered manager at the time of inspection. An application from the newly appointed manager was being processed by CQC.
“The service does not currently have a registered manager.” from the report
- 01Has the newly appointed manager's CQC registration now been completed?
- 02Has the planned redecoration been completed, including the chipped and damaged paintwork?
- 03How do you identify and respond to each person's non-verbal communication and subtle signs of distress?
- 04How are choking risks and safe swallowing plans kept up to date and followed?
- 05How are activities chosen and adapted to each person's preferences, abilities and support needs?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating; three people lived at the home, but inspectors could not speak directly with them. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 September 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 Reiver House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 December 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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.