CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Shortwood House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm, with risk assessments, safety checks and emergency evacuation plans in place. Staff were judged to be sufficient in number and medicines were given safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had suitable training and support. People received choices about food, had access to healthcare and were supported in line with their assessed needs and decisions.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives made very positive comments about staff. Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, dignity and respect, while encouraging independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and life histories. People could take part in activities and hobbies, use accessible communication methods and raise complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had approachable leadership, a person-centred culture and quality monitoring systems. People, relatives and staff were asked for feedback and suggestions.
What inspectors found, March 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improved checks after earlier medicine record inaccuracies.
This was an unannounced inspection on 6 February 2019. One inspector observed care, spoke with four people, a relative, staff and managers, and reviewed two care records and other records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe, were treated kindly, had choices and enjoyed activities. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine practices, good food and effective links with health professionals.
The home was also rated Good at the previous inspection in October 2015. Inspectors found that this rating remained supported and found no evidence of serious risks or concerns.
People felt safe and supported
People said they were happy living at the home and felt safe. Staff responded promptly and inspectors found enough staff on duty.
“People were very happy living at Shortwood House. They felt safe and liked the staff who supported them.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people's likes, dislikes and care preferences. Inspectors saw staff protecting privacy, dignity and independence.
“We saw throughout our inspection that staff were sensitive and discreet when supporting people, they respected people's choices and acted on their requests and decisions.” from the report
Personalised support and activities
Care plans included people's life histories and preferences. People could take part in activities, hobbies and some daily tasks.
“People had a plan of care based on their needs and preferences.” from the report
Good leadership and feedback
The care manager and provider were described as approachable. The home used meetings, feedback and quality checks to monitor care and make improvements.
“There was a quality assurance system in place to monitor all aspects of care and support provided and ensure that staff continued to give high quality care.” from the report
Earlier medicine record inaccuracies
minorThe report says medicine records had previously been inaccurate. Daily checks had been introduced, and inspectors said these made sure records were completed correctly.
“This system was introduced in response to inaccurate medicine records and made sure all records were completed correctly.” from the report
- 01How do you carry out the daily checks on medicine records, and what happens if a mistake is found?
- 02How would you support my relative's particular communication needs, including if they need picture cards, large print or other accessible information?
- 03How would you manage my relative's nutrition, appetite or fluid intake if these became concerns?
- 04What activities would be available that match my relative's interests and life history?
- 05How would my relative and our family be involved in reviewing the care plan and raising concerns?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; the previous Good rating from October 2015 was reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 March 2019 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 Shortwood House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 January 2011.
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
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.”
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.