CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sedgley Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risk assessments, safeguarding training, staffing and recruitment checks were satisfactory, but guidance for some medicines given when needed was not always clear.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff supported people's health, eating and drinking, and worked with health professionals. Staff training and support were described as effective, although the design did not consistently meet the needs of people with dementia or visual impairments.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. They were listened to and involved in decisions, but there were no dedicated diversity care plans.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and activities were adapted to people's interests and abilities. People and relatives were involved in care reviews, and complaints systems were in place.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff expressed confidence in the management team. Audits and action plans were used, but auditing had not identified the gaps in diversity plans and some medicines records.
What inspectors found, June 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some gaps in medicines guidance, diversity planning and dementia-friendly design.
This was the first inspection of the home. It was unannounced and took place on 29 and 30 March 2022. One inspector spoke with people, relatives, staff and a health professional. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files and quality records.
Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness and supported by staff who knew their needs. Care was personalised and people and relatives were involved in care planning. Activities were varied and creative, including events designed around people's interests. Staff worked well with health professionals and supported people to make choices.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means inspectors found the home consistently met the expected standards at the time of the inspection. They also identified some improvements needed, including clearer guidance for some medicines, better recording of cultural and religious needs, and more suitable design for people living with dementia or visual impairments.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives consistently described staff as kind, patient and caring. Inspectors saw that staff listened, protected privacy and supported independence.
“People felt well supported and relatives felt their family members were treated with kindness and compassion.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's preferences, needs and interests. Staff knew people well and adjusted support when their needs or mood changed.
“People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs.” from the report
Creative activities
The home made strong efforts to reduce isolation and provide activities that mattered to people. Inspectors saw examples such as a cruise-themed event and an ice cream van visit.
“Staff were innovative in how they tried to enrich people's lives.” from the report
Good teamwork and health support
Staff shared information and worked with health and social care professionals. Changes in people's health were recorded and passed on to families and professionals.
“Staff worked well as a team, sharing information with each other as necessary to ensure effective care was consistently provided.” from the report
Medicines given when needed
needs fixingInstructions for some medicines given when needed were not always clear, so staff might not have had a consistent approach. Inspectors also found that audits had not identified these recording problems.
“Some people had medicines prescribed 'as required'. However, protocols in place to ensure staff took a consistent approach when supporting people with these medicines was not always clear.” from the report
Cultural and religious needs
needs fixingThe home did not have dedicated diversity care plans. Some information appeared elsewhere, but inspectors said important cultural and religious information was not available in one clear care plan for staff to use.
“There were no diversity plans in people's care planning.” from the report
Dementia-friendly design
minorAlthough the building was well maintained, its decoration did not consistently meet the needs of people living with dementia or people with visual impairments.
“Whilst well-maintained, the décor did not consistently meet the needs of people living with dementia or for those with visual impairments.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the instructions and audits for medicines prescribed 'as required'?
- 02Have dedicated care plans for people's cultural and religious needs now been introduced?
- 03What changes have been made to the décor and layout for people living with dementia or visual impairments?
- 04How many staff are usually working on day and night shifts, and how is this adjusted when people's needs change?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in care planning, reviews and decisions about activities?
This was the first inspection and covered all five CQC areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 June 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 Sedgley Court
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- June 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 December 2020.
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 Staffordshire
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 £1,230 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“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.