CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Simonsfield Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control. They found safe visiting and admission procedures, effective use of protective equipment, regular testing and suitable arrangements for preventing or managing outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were keeping people safe.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 28 October 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, after CQC received information of concern.
Inspectors found safe arrangements for visitors, new admissions, shielding, social distancing and the use of protective equipment. They also found regular COVID-19 testing, suitable supplies of protective equipment and an up-to-date infection control policy.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall rating or a full rating for the five areas of care. It reports only on infection prevention and control.
Safe visiting
The home had procedures to reduce the risk of infection during visits and was planning dedicated family visiting areas for winter.
“The service followed safe visiting procedures to minimise the spread of infection.” from the report
Protective equipment
There was enough protective equipment of the right standard, and staff used and disposed of it correctly.
“There was a good stock of the right standard of PPE and staff used and disposed of it correctly.” from the report
Testing and outbreak planning
People and staff could access regular COVID-19 testing. Inspectors were assured that the home could prevent or manage infection outbreaks.
“We were assured this service were following safe infection prevention and control measures to keep people safe.” from the report
Support to stay in touch
Staff supported people during the pandemic and helped them keep regular contact with family and friends using technology.
“Staff reassured people throughout the pandemic and provided them with the support they needed to maintain regular contact with family and friends through the use of technology.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What visiting arrangements are currently in place, and are there still specific areas for family visits?
- 02How are people newly admitted supported to maintain their health and wellbeing?
- 03How often are residents and staff tested for COVID-19 now?
- 04How does the home help residents keep in contact with family and friends when in-person visits are limited?
- 05How are infection control guidance and updates shared with staff?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the wider quality of care was not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 December 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, June 2019
Simonsfield Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and well-organised care, with minor environmental issues fixed during the visit.
This was an unannounced inspection on 8 and 13 May 2019. Inspectors spoke with 12 people living at the home, five relatives and 10 staff. They reviewed care records, medicines, training, recruitment and management records, and gathered information from other organisations.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, medicines were managed safely, staffing was sufficient and care plans were detailed. People received suitable food and drinks, had access to health professionals and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
Activities were varied and included trips into the community. The home was described as well managed, with strong feedback from people, relatives and staff. Inspectors noted some cleaning and garden maintenance issues at the start, but the registered manager acted promptly to address them.
The overall Good rating means the service met legal requirements and inspectors found consistently good outcomes for people. The previous inspection, published on 16 December 2016, also rated the home Good.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke very positively about staff. Inspectors observed staff protecting privacy and dignity and building positive relationships.
“Staff routinely knocked on people's doors and waited to be invited in.” from the report
Good dementia support
The environment was adapted to help people living with dementia find their way around and take part in activities. Staff had dementia training and understood people's communication needs.
“Decoration and signage had been set out to make it easy and comfortable for people living with dementia to navigate the building and find their rooms.” from the report
Personalised care and activities
Care plans included people's histories, preferences and needs. The home offered regular activities and two trips into the local community each week.
“The service had two-part time activities coordinators who planned a weekly activity schedule in-house plus two trips out each week in the local community.” from the report
Strong management and oversight
The registered manager was visible and approachable. Audits identified areas for improvement and actions were taken.
“The registered manager had developed a comprehensive and robust system to monitor and maintain high levels of care and support provided to people” from the report
Cleaning detail needed attention
minorInspectors saw discolouration around posters fixed with cello tape on the first day. The posters were removed by the second day to improve cleaning in that area.
“During day one of the inspection we noted a number of posters displayed with the use of cello tape with a build-up of discolouration around the tape and posters.” from the report
Garden maintenance
minorThe outside areas needed weeding and maintenance when inspectors first visited. Action was taken during the inspection to improve the garden.
“During day one of the inspection we noted the outside areas needed maintenance and weeding.” from the report
End of life care was not observed
minorNo one was receiving end of life care during the inspection. Staff said they had specific training and would work with community health professionals if this support became necessary.
“At the time of this inspection there were no persons in receipt of end of life care.” from the report
- 01How would you support my relative's end of life care, and which community health professionals would be involved?
- 02How do you keep the dementia-friendly environment and garden maintained?
- 03How will you assess staffing levels if my relative's needs increase?
- 04How would you involve me and my relative in reviewing the care plan?
- 05What activities and trips would be suitable for my relative's interests and abilities?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the premises; no one was receiving end of life care at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 June 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 Simonsfield Care Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Halton
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. 89 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.