CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Southlands Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and staff understood safeguarding. Staffing levels were judged safe, but some people waited more than ten minutes for help with call bells, and the home was reviewing this.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff received induction and training, and people's health, nutrition and mobility needs were supported. Records did not always clearly show consent or best-interest decisions, and supervision records did not always show all the support given to staff.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. They offered choices, respected privacy and supported people's end-of-life wishes.
- Responsive?
- Good
- People had personalised care and a range of activities, and complaints were handled appropriately. More work was being developed to provide one-to-one activities for people cared for in bed and to record personal preferences more fully.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Leadership was described as positive and approachable. Regular checks identified areas for improvement, and the staff team used incidents and feedback to learn and make changes.
What inspectors found, September 2017
Southlands Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care, with some records and call-bell response needing improvement.
Inspectors visited on 3 and 14 August 2017. The first visit was unannounced and the second was announced. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training, equipment and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people felt safe, staff knew them well, medicines were generally managed safely and people's health and nutrition needs were supported.
Staff were kind and respectful. People were offered choices and had access to activities, although more work was planned for people cared for in bed. The home had effective leadership and acted on feedback, but some records and call-bell response times needed further attention.
The home had also been rated Good at the previous inspection in March 2015. This inspection found that the overall rating remained Good.
Kind and respectful care
Staff interacted gently and courteously. They respected privacy, dignity and people's choices about their care.
“We saw staff interacted with people in a gentle, kind and courteous way.” from the report
Good support for health
Care plans covered eating, drinking and health needs. Staff worked with health professionals and the home offered physiotherapy to support mobility.
“We saw all advice was recorded in peoples care plans and that staff followed this to support people to maintain good health.” from the report
Positive leadership
The manager was visible and approachable. Staff felt listened to, and regular checks and action plans supported improvement.
“Leadership of the home was positive and this had driven, developed and maintained a positive culture where people and staff felt they were listened to” from the report
Activities and choice
There was a varied activity programme, and people could help choose activities. The home also recognised that people cared for in bed needed more tailored support.
“People who chose to join in the activities were pleased with the variety and were able to be involved in choosing what was to be included in the programme.” from the report
Call-bell waiting times
needs fixingSome people waited more than ten minutes for support at times. The manager was investigating these waits and reviewing staffing as new people moved into the home.
“Work was currently underway to ensure call bells were responded to quickly and in a timely manner.” from the report
Some medicines records
needs fixingMedicines were generally managed safely, but instructions for medicines given when needed were not always recorded. Staff also did not always sign when creams had been applied.
“Where people required medicines 'as and when required' we saw protocols were not always in place and that staff had not always signed to say creams had been administered.” from the report
Consent records
needs fixingRecords did not always make it clear whether people could consent or whether a best-interest decision had been made. The manager said the team was working to improve this.
“Records were not always completed to ensure it was clear people were able to consent or that a best interest decision had been made on behalf of a person.” from the report
- 01How long do people currently wait for help after using their call bell, especially during busy periods?
- 02What changes have been made to ensure medicines given when needed and creams are fully recorded?
- 03How do you make sure changes in a person's needs are transferred promptly into the main care instructions?
- 04How are consent and best-interest decisions recorded for people who may lack capacity?
- 05What one-to-one activities are now available for people who spend much of their time in bed?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with the first visit unannounced and the second visit announced. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 September 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 Southlands Care Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2017Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 March 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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of North 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 £1,010 to £1,290 a week. 27 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.