Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Sheepwalk House

Goodpublished 14 October 2025, 11 months ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, August 2018

Sheepwalk House is rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some records and medicines checks needing attention.

Inspectors made an unannounced comprehensive visit on 17 July 2018. They spoke with the manager, staff, relatives and health and social care professionals. They also observed people, reviewed three care plans and checked medicines, training, risk assessments and other records.

The home supported four people on the day of inspection and could accommodate up to five people with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. Inspectors found people were safe, cared for kindly and supported to make choices, stay active and follow their interests.

There were some issues to improve. Supervision meetings had not always taken place as often as planned. Medicines had sometimes been stored above the recommended temperature, advice about taking some medicines with food had initially not been obtained, and some care and cleaning records were incomplete.

The overall rating and all five question ratings were Good. This means the inspectors found the service met the relevant standards at the time of this inspection. Improvements had been made since the previous inspection, especially in staff training, and an action plan was in place for further improvements.

What inspectors praised
  • Kind relationships

    Inspectors saw warm and respectful interactions. Relatives also spoke positively about the staff team.

    “We saw staff spoke kindly and had happy and warm interactions with people.” from the report
  • Personalised activities

    People took part in activities matched to their interests, both at home and in the community.

    “We saw people received personalised and responsive care, for example, each person had been involved in a different activity that was of personal interest to them.” from the report
  • Choice and independence

    Staff supported people to make choices and do everyday tasks such as food preparation and laundry.

    “This demonstrated that staff respected people's privacy and promoted their independence.” from the report
  • Safe staffing

    Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's individual needs and support their activities.

    “There was sufficient staff to meet people's individual needs.” from the report
  • Quality monitoring

    The provider used audits and an action plan to identify improvements and reduce risks.

    “Systems and processes were in place to effectively monitor and improve the service and reduce risks.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Medicines with food

    needs fixing

    Some people took medicines in yoghurt or ice cream. Pharmacist advice had not been obtained before the inspection, although advice was provided shortly afterwards and confirmed this was safe.

    “advice from a pharmacist would be required to ensure there were no contraindications to taking specific medicines with these foods; this had not been obtained.” from the report
  • Staff supervision

    needs fixing

    Supervision meetings had not always happened as often as the provider said they should. An action plan was in place to improve this.

    “Supervision meetings had not always been held at the frequency identified by the provider as required” from the report
  • Incomplete records

    minor

    One care plan was being updated, another did not yet reflect a diet change, and cleaning records were not always fully completed. The manager sent updated care plans shortly after the inspection and improvement actions were planned.

    “Records of cleaning had not always been fully completed, however we saw actions to improve this had been included on an action plan following a recent audit by the provider.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What changes have been made to keep the medicine storage room within the recommended temperature range?
  2. 02How do you now make sure pharmacist advice is obtained before medicines are given with yoghurt or ice cream?
  3. 03Has the action plan ensured that staff supervision meetings happen at the required frequency?
  4. 04Have all care plans been updated promptly when people's diets or other needs change?
  5. 05How do you check that cleaning records are completed consistently?

This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions; inspectors could not speak directly with people because of their communication needs, and end-of-life care was not reviewed because nobody was receiving it. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 August 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Sheepwalk House

2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. August 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Sheepwalk House →

  2. March 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. May 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. May 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. December 2010

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire

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. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.

“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
Melanie B., about Ernest C.
See live-in carers near NottinghamshireProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.