CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Stockingate Residential Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, November 2022
Stockingate Residential Home is rated Good; inspectors found safe care and better oversight after previous breaches were addressed.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 31 October 2022. The inspector checked whether the home had improved infection control and management systems after the previous inspection.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable recruitment checks and effective steps to protect people from abuse and infection.
Management systems had improved. Audits, incident reviews, staff feedback and an improvement plan were being used to monitor safety and quality. The home was no longer in breach of the regulations identified at the previous inspection.
Only Safe and Well-led were inspected during this visit. The other ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection, and the overall rating changed from Requires Improvement to Good.
Enough staff
People and staff said there were enough staff, and inspectors saw people being supported promptly without unnecessary waits.
“We saw people were supported promptly and did not have to wait for their support.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicine records were complete, stock levels matched the records and staff had training and competency checks.
“People's medicines administration records (MARs) were completed correctly and medicines stock held by the service was consistent with stock levels documented on the MARs.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The home reviewed accidents and falls to look for patterns and took action such as reviewing care needs, staffing or professional referrals.
“A tracker was used to analyse falls each month.” from the report
Improved oversight
The manager's monitoring, regular audits and improvement plan had strengthened the way the home checked safety and quality.
“The audits were driving improvement and there was an improvement plan in place for making sure any areas requiring improvement were addressed.” from the report
Positive culture
People and staff described the home as friendly and approachable. Staff said communication and morale had improved.
“The management structure has changed, and I believe communication is much better.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you use dependency assessments to decide how many staff are needed on each shift?
- 02How are medicines records, stock levels and as-needed medicines checked now?
- 03What actions from the current improvement plan are still outstanding?
- 04How do you review falls and other incidents, and how do you make sure learning is shared with staff?
- 05How will you gather and act on the views of residents and relatives about the care provided?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 November 2022 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, December 2021
Stockingate Residential Home was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care but safety and management systems were not reliable enough.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 19 October 2021. Inspectors looked at Safe, Caring and Well-led because concerns had been raised about safeguarding. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicines and management records.
People said they felt safe and there were enough staff. Inspectors saw kind and respectful interactions, good support for people living with dementia, and a programme of activities. The Caring rating was Good.
There were important shortfalls. Infection control guidance was not always followed, one person's falls guidance was not followed, medicines records were incomplete, and care plans lacked person-centred detail. Three safeguarding incidents had not been reported to the CQC. Safe and Well-led were both rated Requires Improvement.
The overall rating stayed at Requires Improvement, the same as the previous rating published in January 2020. The other two questions, Effective and Responsive, were not inspected at this visit, so their previous ratings were used in the overall rating.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed natural, empathetic interactions. Staff supported people with dementia and protected their privacy and dignity.
“We saw regular interactions with people when staff entered the room.” from the report
People felt safe
People and relatives consistently said they felt safe. Staff could describe how to recognise and report abuse.
“People consistently told us they felt safe and their relatives also shared this view.” from the report
Enough staff
People, relatives and staff said staffing levels were sufficient on both day and night shifts.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff on both day and night shifts.” from the report
Activities and feedback
The home offered regular activities and asked people for views about areas such as food, laundry, activities and cleaning.
“People were engaged through an activities programme which was organised by an enthusiastic coordinator.” from the report
Infection control
seriousStaff were not changing clothes when arriving and leaving, as required by the local COVID-19 guidance. A small number of staff were also seen wearing masks under their chins.
“This was a breach of regulation 12(2)(g) (Safe care and treatment) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008” from the report
Falls risks and maintenance
needs fixingOne person's care plan required a clutter-free environment, but furniture created a trip hazard. Inspectors also found flooring that needed repair.
“This person was left unsupervised with a bedside table pushed up against their armchair, which they struggled to remove.” from the report
Medicines recording
needs fixingA controlled drugs record did not contain enough information. On one occasion, the staff member giving medicines left without checking that the person had taken them.
“However, on one occasion, the staff member administering left without checking a person had taken their medicines.” from the report
Care plans and reporting
seriousCare plans lacked person-centred detail and audits had not identified this. Three safeguarding incidents involving the same person had not been reported to the CQC.
“This was a breach of regulation 17 (Good Governance) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008” from the report
Dementia-friendly features
minorSome bedroom doors did not have identifying features. The CQC recommended making the home more dementia friendly through signage, colour schemes and other features.
“We recommend the provider takes steps to make the home more dementia friendly” from the report
- 01What checks now show that staff change clothing on arrival and departure and wear masks correctly?
- 02How do you make sure medicines are witnessed as taken and controlled drugs records contain all required details?
- 03What changes have been made to care plans so they give staff person-centred instructions?
- 04How have you reduced the identified falls risks and completed the flooring repairs?
- 05What system now ensures all safeguarding incidents are reported to the CQC on time?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Caring and Well-led; Effective and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 December 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.
Every inspection of Stockingate Residential Home
9 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- November 2022Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Stockingate Residential Home →
- December 2021Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Stockingate Residential Home →
- January 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementCaring: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Inadequate
- January 2017Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2016Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- October 2015Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 December 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
92 live-in carers within about an hour of Wakefield
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. 79 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.”
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.