CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Sophie House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People's individual risks were understood and recorded, including risks when moving around the home or eating. Medicines were administered by trained staff whose competence was checked.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care was based on people's needs, preferences and views. Staff had training and worked with health professionals, including speech and language therapists, physiotherapists and occupational therapists.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff knew people well, communicated in ways people understood and respected their choices. People's dignity and independence were promoted.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences and were regularly reviewed. People were supported with activities, community time and contact with important people.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a registered manager and systems to check care quality, medicines, staff training and the environment. Relatives, staff and professionals were asked for their views, and suggestions led to changes.
What inspectors found, February 2019
Sophie House was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with recruitment still under way.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 5 December 2018. One inspector looked at the home, care records, medicines records and management checks. They spoke with staff and relatives and observed how people were supported.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were treated with respect, supported to make choices and helped to maintain their independence.
People had access to activities suited to their interests, healthcare and support to keep in touch with important people. Staff understood people's risks, had suitable training and managed medicines safely.
The Good rating means the inspectors found that people's needs were met and legal requirements were being followed. The previous inspection was also rated Good.
Respectful, individual care
Staff knew people well and used their communication preferences, histories and choices to provide personal care. Inspectors saw people being treated warmly and with respect.
“Staff knew people well, and gave us examples of things which were important to people.” from the report
Activities and community life
People were supported to enjoy activities that reflected their interests, both at home and outside it. This included music therapy, hydrotherapy, wheelchair dancing and time in the community.
“People had a range of interesting things to do within the home and externally.” from the report
Safe medicines and risk support
Staff understood people's safety risks and acted to reduce them. Medicines were stored, administered and checked safely.
“People's medicines were managed safely. Staff had to undertake training and their competency was checked before they could administer people's medicines.” from the report
Trained staff and health support
Staff received induction and training linked to the needs of the people living at the home. The home also worked with health professionals to support people's health outcomes.
“Staff had been supported to develop the knowledge and skills they needed to care for people.” from the report
Good management
The manager and senior staff checked the quality of care and listened to relatives, staff and professionals. Suggestions were used to improve activities and care.
“The registered manager sought the views of relatives, staff and other health and social care providers by talking with them.” from the report
Recruitment and agency staff
minorThe home was recruiting additional staff. Inspectors found enough staff at the inspection, and agency staff were supported by permanent staff who knew people's needs.
“The registered manager was in the process of recruiting additional staff so people would benefit from support from a staff team who continued to understand people's care and safety needs.” from the report
- 01How many permanent staff now work at the home, and is recruitment of additional staff complete?
- 02How often are agency staff used, and how are they introduced to each person's safety and communication needs?
- 03Are the music therapy, hydrotherapy, community activities and other interests described in the report still available?
- 04How are medicines checked now, and how is staff competence to administer them assessed?
- 05How are relatives involved when care plans and people's preferences are reviewed?
This was an unannounced planned inspection of the care, nursing and premises, and all five CQC questions were assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 February 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 Sophie House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 September 2012.
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
11 live-in carers within about an hour of Herefordshire, County of
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 £960 to £1,410 a week. 10 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.