CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Summerfield House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that people were protected from avoidable harm. Staffing, recruitment, medicines, risk management, infection control and learning from incidents were all found to be safe.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found that management systems had improved. Audits were robust, recruitment procedures were safer, and managers and staff promoted a positive, person-centred culture.
What inspectors found, June 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care and improvements in management since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 31 May 2022. One inspector reviewed records, medicines information, staff files and management records, and spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough skilled staff, safe recruitment, well-managed medicines, detailed risk records and suitable infection control arrangements. People were supported to make choices, stay independent and take part in activities and visits.
The previous inspection rated the service Requires Improvement and found a breach of Regulation 17, Good Governance. The provider made improvements, including stronger audits and recruitment checks, and was no longer in breach at this inspection.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only. The ratings for the other key questions were carried over from the previous inspection, and the overall rating changed to Good based on this inspection.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, manage risks and live as independently as possible. Staff focused on people's abilities and interests.
“Staff supported people to have the maximum possible choice, control and independence so they had control over their own lives.” from the report
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff with the right skills to meet people's needs, including one-to-one support for activities and visits. Recruitment checks and induction had improved.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff with the skills and knowledge to meet people's needs.” from the report
Medicines and risk management
Medicines were reviewed and managed through clear systems, staff training and competency checks. Risk records were detailed, current and easy for staff to access.
“People were supported by staff who followed systems and processes to prescribe, administer, record and store medicines safely.” from the report
Improved leadership
The provider had acted on the previous inspection findings. Audits were identifying shortfalls and actions were being completed in a timely way.
“Enough improvement had been made at this inspection and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation 17.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What are the current ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive, which were not covered by this focused inspection?
- 02How are the improved audits checked now, and what happens when an audit finds a shortfall?
- 03How do you keep recruitment checks, references and DBS checks up to date for all staff?
- 04How are people involved in decisions about their risks, medicines, activities and visits?
- 05How are medicines reviewed, including medicines given only when needed?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 June 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, April 2022
Summerfield House was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control practice.
This was a targeted inspection on 25 March 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control during COVID-19, and on whether staffing pressures affected people.
Inspectors found the home visibly clean and free of clutter. Staff used personal protective equipment in line with government guidance. Risk assessments had been put in place for people and staff.
Inspectors were assured about visiting, social distancing, admissions, testing, protective equipment, hygiene, outbreak management and the infection control policy. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Clean environment
The home was visibly clean and free of clutter.
“The home was visibly clean and free of clutter.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff were seen using personal protective equipment in line with government guidance.
“Staff were observed wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in line with current Government guidance.” from the report
Risk assessments
Risk assessments had been put in place for people and staff to reduce the risk from COVID-19.
“The registered manager had implemented robust risk assessments for people and staff to reduce the risk of COVID-19.” from the report
Support for hearing loss
Clear face masks were made available when staff supported people with hearing loss.
“The registered manager had made clear facemasks available to staff when supporting people with hearing loss.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently managing staffing pressures linked to COVID-19, and what effect do they have on people's care?
- 02How do you make sure protective equipment, testing and visiting arrangements remain in line with current guidance?
- 03How do you support people with hearing loss when staff need to wear face masks?
- 04What infection control arrangements are used to prevent and manage an outbreak?
- 05When was the infection prevention and control policy last reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with questions about staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection of all five care questions and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 April 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.
Every inspection of Summerfield House
6 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 January 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Dudley
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 £1,230 a week. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
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.