CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Shipley Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People's risks were assessed and reviewed, and staff understood safeguarding procedures. Medicines were managed safely, although the home had introduced extra daily checks after errors were found during audits.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and support. People were helped with food choices, healthcare appointments and moves between services, and staff understood the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors found kind and supportive relationships. People were involved in decisions, and staff respected privacy, dignity, communication preferences and personal space.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed, personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported to follow their interests, work towards recovery goals and raise complaints in an accessible way.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open culture, supportive managers and effective audits. Staff understood their roles and felt able to speak up about concerns.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with staff vacancies being managed.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 16 January 2020. They spoke with five people, five staff members and a visiting professional. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff recruitment and supervision records, audits and the improvement plan.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, well-managed medicines, clean surroundings and staff who understood people's needs and risks.
People were treated with dignity and involved in decisions about their care. Care plans were detailed and focused on people's preferences and recovery goals. The home had learned from earlier medicines errors and had introduced daily checks.
The overall rating remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection published on 22 July 2017. The report says the home will continue to be monitored through the usual inspection programme.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs safely and respond promptly. Casual and agency staff were being used while vacancies were filled.
“There were enough staff to ensure that people's needs were met safely.” from the report
Kind relationships
Staff understood that people wanted different levels of company and reassurance. They treated people with dignity and respected their choices.
“People had caring, kind, supportive relationships with the staff who supported them.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, needs and recovery goals. Staff knew people well and reviewed support with them.
“Care plans were personalised and very detailed.” from the report
Learning from mistakes
The home had changed its medicines process after errors were identified. Daily checks and extra mentoring had been introduced.
“A new approach to medicines management had been introduced after there were errors found during audits.” from the report
Respect for choice
People were involved in decisions about their care and were supported to communicate in ways that suited them. Staff aimed to use the least restrictive approach.
“All decisions and choices about care were made in consultation with people.” from the report
Staff vacancies
minorThere were vacancies, although the report says there was a recruitment plan and enough staff at the time of inspection. Ask how often agency staff are used and whether this has changed.
“There were staff vacancies and a recruitment plan in place to fill these.” from the report
- 01How many staff vacancies are there now, and how often are casual or agency staff used?
- 02What daily medicines checks were introduced after the earlier errors, and have any further problems been found?
- 03How would you support my relative to set and review personal recovery goals?
- 04How would you adapt information and care plans if my relative needs pictures, symbols or another accessible format?
- 05How would you manage a move into the home or a move to another service so that it happens at a pace that suits my relative?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering the home, the care provided and all five CQC questions; the ratings remained the same as at the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 February 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, July 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support, with no major shortfalls identified.
This was a comprehensive inspection on 4 and 5 July 2017. The first day was unannounced. Inspectors spoke with five people, four staff, the manager and four health and social care professionals. They also checked care records, medicine records, staff files and quality checks.
The home provided nursing and personal care for 16 people with mental health needs. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines were managed safely, staffing was sufficient, and staff had suitable training and checks.
People were involved in planning their care and were supported to build confidence and independence. Inspectors found kind care, activities suited to people's preferences, good access to health services and systems for handling complaints and improving quality.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspection found the service met the required standards at the time of the visit. It had also been rated Good at the previous inspection.
People felt safe
Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff understood individual risks and knew how to report safeguarding concerns.
“People were protected from the risk of abuse and avoidable harm.” from the report
Personalised care
People helped plan their care and set goals. Support was adjusted to their wishes, pace and aspirations, including building skills to manage medicines and prepare food.
“People were involved in planning and reviewing their care and support.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff responded promptly and supported people in a calm and caring way. They spent time with people who were anxious or distressed.
“We saw staff support people in a calm and caring manner during our visit.” from the report
Activities and choices
People could choose from group and individual activities, including trips out. They were also supported to choose what and where to eat.
“The provider offered a range of group and individual activities that met people's preferences.” from the report
No registered manager at the visit
minorThe home did not have a registered manager when inspectors visited. An experienced manager was in post and was applying to register, so families may want to check the current management position.
“The service did not have a registered manager at the time of our inspection visit.” from the report
- 01Has the manager now completed the application to register with the CQC?
- 02How will staff support my relative to manage medicines safely and develop independence?
- 03How are care plans reviewed when a person's mental health needs, wishes or goals change?
- 04What activities and food choices would be available to suit my relative's preferences and background?
- 05How are complaints, accidents and incidents reviewed, and what improvements have followed?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the first day unannounced; the previous inspection was also rated Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 July 2017 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 Shipley Lodge
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 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
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.