CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Greenacres
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks, staffing, recruitment, medicines, infection control and visiting arrangements were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive, person-centred culture. The home had quality checks and oversight, and people, relatives and staff said the management was approachable and supportive.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care and strong management, but this inspection only assessed safety and leadership.
Inspectors visited the home on 16 and 20 November 2023. They spoke with 3 people, 3 relatives and 6 staff. They also checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training, incidents and management records.
They found enough staff, safe recruitment, well-managed risks and safe medicines practice. People were supported to make choices, and staff knew their communication needs. Relatives and staff were positive about the care and management.
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 to calculate the overall rating.
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and said the required recruitment checks had been completed before staff started work.
“There were sufficient staff deployed to meet people's needs” from the report
Personalised support
Care records gave clear information about people's needs, risks and preferences. Staff knew people well and supported their choices.
“Records were person centred, respectful and gave good detail of what was important to and for the person.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines records were complete, and medicines were stored and given safely. Relatives said people received their medicines as required.
“Medicines records were complete, and medicines were stored and administered safely” from the report
Positive management
Inspectors found detailed checks and oversight to support improvements. People, relatives and staff spoke positively about how the home was managed.
“There was a positive person-centred culture at the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What has changed in the areas that were not inspected during this visit, namely Effective, Caring and Responsive?
- 02How are each person's support plans and risk assessments reviewed when their needs change?
- 03How do you check that medicines continue to be recorded, stored and given safely?
- 04How are people and relatives involved in decisions about care and support?
- 05What quality checks are carried out, and how do you use them to improve the service?
This inspection assessed Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the previous inspection published on 11 October 2018. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 December 2023 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 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care across all five areas.
This was a comprehensive inspection on 21 August 2018. It was announced 48 hours in advance. The inspector spoke with three people living at the home, three staff and two relatives. They also observed care and checked care plans, recruitment records, medicines records, training, complaints and quality checks.
The home supported four people with learning disabilities and could support up to five. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines handling, reviewed risk assessments and suitable recruitment checks. People were supported to make choices, stay independent, eat well and take part in activities in the community.
Inspectors saw kind and respectful interactions. Care plans were personalised and updated when people's needs changed. The home had systems to learn from incidents, respond to complaints and monitor quality. The overall rating remained Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines records were accurate and staff competency was checked.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
Staff were seen listening carefully and giving people time to communicate. People were treated with dignity and respect.
“During our inspection we observed positive and caring interactions between staff and people who used the service.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in decisions about their lives and supported to do things for themselves. They could choose activities and access the local community.
“People's independence was promoted and staff understood the importance of maintaining this.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans described how people wanted to be supported and were updated when needs changed. Staff knew people's preferences and interests.
“Care was person centred and met people's individual needs.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff were included in decisions about the home. The manager and provider used audits and feedback to monitor care.
“The registered manager and provider had systems in place to check on the quality of the service people received.” from the report
Minor recording errors
minorA provider audit found a receipt number for a person's expenditure had not been recorded, and one staff member had not used the 24-hour clock. The report says action was taken to address these issues.
“These related to a receipt number about a person's expenditure that had not been documented and a staff member had not used the 24 hour clock method of recording.” from the report
- 01How would you support my relative's particular communication needs and help them express their choices?
- 02What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative?
- 03How would you manage my relative's dietary needs and support healthy eating?
- 04How are medicines checked and how is staff competency kept up to date?
- 05How do you record and follow up any incidents or errors in people's financial records?
This was an announced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, and the previous Good ratings continued. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 October 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 Greenacres
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 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.