CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Snaith Hall Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments and safe medicines arrangements. The home was clean, and staff followed infection control guidance.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found good oversight, regular checks and audits, open communication with families and effective partnership working. Staff described the registered manager as approachable.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found people were safe and well cared for, with clean surroundings and effective management.
This was a focused inspection on 13 January 2021, prompted by concerns about infection control. One inspector spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers, observed care, walked around the home and checked care, medicine, staff and management records.
The home was clean and tidy. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and checks on accidents and incidents. People and relatives said they felt safe, and staff were patient, kind and respectful.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used when calculating the overall rating.
Infection control
The home was clean and tidy, and staff had training in infection prevention and control. Inspectors found staff were following Covid-19 guidance.
“All areas were clean, tidy and there was sufficient cleaning taking place to keep people safe from the risk of infection.” from the report
Staffing and safety
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff recruitment checks and safety training had been completed.
“There were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind, respectful care
Staff were observed treating people with patience, kindness and respect. Care was described as person-centred, with staff making time to talk with people.
“We observed staff being patient, kind and respectful towards people.” from the report
Management and communication
The home had regular checks and audits, and families said communication was open and clear. The registered manager had made positive changes since coming into post.
“There was evidence of good leadership, oversight and management within the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently check that infection prevention and control measures remain effective?
- 02How are medicines checked, including for people who are encouraged to manage their own medicines?
- 03How do you review falls, accidents and incidents, and what changes have resulted from that learning?
- 04What positive changes has the registered manager made since coming into post, and how have you checked their effect?
- 05How do you make sure staffing levels remain sufficient for people's needs?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection were carried forward when calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 January 2021 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, October 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with improvements made since the previous inspection.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 22 August and 4 September 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, care workers and health professionals. They observed care, mealtimes and medicine rounds, and checked care records, staff files and management records.
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 had enough staff to meet their needs. They also found kind care, personalised support plans, activities and good links with health professionals.
The home had previously been rated Requires Improvement in June 2016 and had breached four regulations. At this inspection, the inspectors found the provider had completed the required actions and identified no new breaches.
Safe medicines
Staff involved with medicines were trained and observed following a clear process. Records, storage and audits were up to date.
“Systems and processes ensured that where people had been assessed as requiring assistance with medicines, these were administered safely by trained care workers.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness and respect. Staff knocked before entering rooms and supported privacy and dignity.
“We observed staff being kind, compassionate and respectful towards people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's routines, abilities, interests and preferences. Records were reviewed and changed when people's needs changed.
“Support plans were person centred and reflected individual's preferences.” from the report
Activities and involvement
The activities coordinator learned about people's interests and offered group or one-to-one activities. People, relatives and staff were also asked for their views.
“These meant residents were offered relevant and meaningful activities to participate in that they enjoyed.” from the report
Improved management
The provider had introduced detailed audits and action plans. The previous inspection's concerns had been addressed and no new breaches were found.
“There were robust systems of audit in place to check, monitor and improve the quality of the service.” from the report
Bed safety
seriousInspectors found a large gap at the foot of one mattress, which they considered a safety risk. The manager raised the matter with the supplier and carried out further checks.
“We found one bed had a large gap at the foot of the mattress.” from the report
Lasting Power of Attorney records
needs fixingChecks found that some Lasting Powers of Attorney were not always valid or did not clearly show the person's decision-making powers. Further work was planned to make the care records accurate.
“Further work was planned to ensure care plans accurately recorded where a LPOA had been validated and the scope of the appointee to make decisions on behalf of the person.” from the report
- 01What action was taken about the bed with the large gap at the foot of the mattress?
- 02Have all Lasting Powers of Attorney now been checked and recorded with the correct decision-making powers?
- 03How are care plans reviewed when a person's needs change?
- 04How many care workers are normally on duty during the day and at night?
- 05How are activities matched to each person's interests and communication needs?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality and safety of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 October 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 Snaith Hall Care Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 April 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
16 live-in carers within about an hour of East Riding of Yorkshire
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 £1,030 to £1,420 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
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.