CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sawley
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, June 2018
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but recruitment checks were not always fully explored.
Inspectors made a comprehensive unannounced visit on 12 June 2018. They spoke with people living in the home, a relative, the manager and care staff. They also observed care, checked care records, recruitment files, training records and quality checks.
The home continued to provide caring and personalised support. People were supported to make choices, stay in touch with family and friends, take part in activities and access health services. Staff understood people's needs and supported communication, independence and community involvement.
The main shortfall was in recruitment checks. Information on one staff member's DBS check and an 11-year gap in their employment history had not been fully explored, although immediate action was taken during the inspection. The complaints information also needed updating to explain how complaints could be taken further.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were rated Good. Safe was rated Requires Improvement, which means the inspectors found a specific area needing improvement even though the overall rating remained Good.
Personalised support
Staff knew people's routines, interests and preferences. People were supported to take part in activities, follow their routines and work towards personal goals.
“Staff demonstrated that they knew people well.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make everyday choices and to live as independently as possible, with accessible communication methods used when needed.
“People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives” from the report
Caring relationships
Inspectors saw staff communicating effectively and treating people with dignity. People were helped to keep in contact with family and friends.
“A positive and caring approach was provided by the staff team.” from the report
Activities and community life
People were supported to go out, use community facilities and take part in activities suited to their interests.
“Everyone undertook activities within the community with their staff support.” from the report
Quality monitoring
Audits covered areas such as staffing, training, medicines, infection control and care plans. Inspectors saw that actions identified through audits had been completed.
“This demonstrated that the systems in place to drive improvement were effective.” from the report
Recruitment checks
seriousThe home did not fully explore information on one staff member's DBS check or an 11-year employment gap. The manager took immediate action, but inspectors could not be assured that recruitment checks were consistently thorough.
“We could not be assured that the practices in place ensured thorough recruitment checks were undertaken.” from the report
Complaints information
needs fixingThe complaints procedure did not explain how a complaint could be taken to the Local Authority or Local Government Ombudsman if it was not resolved by the home.
“However this information did not contain details of the Local Authority or Local Government Ombudsman; where complaints could be escalated to if not resolved at provider level.” from the report
- 01What action was taken after the inspection to make sure DBS information is always discussed and assessed?
- 02How do you now check and document gaps in a potential staff member's employment history?
- 03What information do families receive about taking a complaint to the Local Authority or Local Government Ombudsman?
- 04How do you make sure people's individual communication methods, routines and goals are reflected in their current support plans?
- 05How are medicines and staff competency checks monitored for each person?
This was a comprehensive inspection of all five key questions; end of life care was not covered because no one was receiving it at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 June 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 Sawley
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 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
62 live-in carers within about an hour of Derbyshire
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 £1,010 to £1,260 a week. 51 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.