CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sidegate Lane Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and risks such as falls, poor nutrition and pressure ulcers were managed. Inspectors found that two people did not always have their call bells within reach, and chairs and wheelchairs were sometimes stored in a risky place.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training and supervision, and people were supported with nutrition, hydration and access to health professionals. The quality of staff interactions during meals varied, with some staff providing little engagement.
- Caring?
- Good
- People described good relationships with staff, who usually treated them with kindness, dignity and respect. Inspectors saw one interaction that was not as caring, which was raised with the management team.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was planned around people's needs, routines and preferences, and staff provided personalised support. Records about support after distress varied in detail, and people and relatives had mixed views about activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor quality and make improvements. There was no registered manager in post, although a new manager was applying to register with CQC.
What inspectors found, July 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but some call bells and records needed attention.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 13 June 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, the manager and staff. They observed care and checked care records, recruitment files, training and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, received medicines safely, and were supported by trained staff. The home was clean and people had access to health professionals.
People generally described staff as kind and respectful. Care was planned around individual needs and preferences. Inspectors also found some shortfalls, including call bells not always being within reach, variable recording of support, and some less caring interactions.
The overall Good rating stayed the same as at the previous inspection in March 2016. The report says there was no evidence of serious risks or concerns.
Safe medicines
Inspectors observed medicines being given safely. Staff had suitable training and their competence was checked.
“Medicines continued to be administered safely.” from the report
Kind relationships
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff listening, communicating at eye level and supporting people with patience.
“People told us that they had good relationships with the staff and they felt that the staff were caring and respectful.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's routines, preferences and wishes. Staff adapted support to individual needs, including changing medicine times after discussion with a GP.
“People's care records demonstrated that they had been involved in their care planning.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used audits and reviewed accidents, incidents and complaints to identify problems and make changes.
“The manager continued to undertake a programme of audits to assess the quality of the service and identify issues.” from the report
Some records lacked detail
needs fixingRecords of support given when people were distressed were inconsistent. Some entries did not explain what staff had actually done.
“However, records of the support staff had provided to people during and following their distress varied in quality.” from the report
Mixed activity provision
minorPeople and relatives gave different views about activities and stimulation. The manager recognised that more could be done and had plans to improve this.
“We received mixed views from people and relatives about the activities and stimulation provided in the service.” from the report
Manager registration
minorThere was no registered manager at the time of the inspection. The new manager had been in post since February 2018 and was applying to register.
“There was not a registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01How do you check that every person can reach their call bell, including people who may move or need repositioning?
- 02How do you make sure staff record clearly what support was given when someone becomes distressed?
- 03What activities would be available for my relative, and how would you adapt them to their interests, health and energy levels?
- 04What progress has been made with the manager's CQC registration?
- 05How is the new electronic care-record system checked to make sure information remains accurate and complete?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions; all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection in March 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 July 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 Sidegate Lane Care Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 July 2014.
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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Suffolk
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 17 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
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.