CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Taylor View and Gilbert Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- The home had good arrangements for visitors, cleaning, social distancing, admissions, outbreak management and vaccination. Inspectors were only somewhat assured about PPE, infection-control training and the frequency of testing.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Taylor View and Gilbert Lodge was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection-control arrangements but some gaps in PPE, training and testing.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 31 January 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
The home had visitor checks, supported visits with family and friends, regular cleaning of high-contact areas, and clean premises. Inspectors were assured about visiting, admissions, shielding, social distancing, infection outbreaks, the infection-control policy and COVID-19 vaccination requirements.
Inspectors were only somewhat assured about PPE and testing. One staff member was not wearing a mask correctly, eye protection was not readily available, some newer staff had not completed infection-control training, and testing was not always frequent enough. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a Good or Inadequate overall judgement.
Visits and infection prevention
The home had checks for visitors and supported people to meet family and friends safely. Cleaning included high-contact areas.
“Cleaning schedules included regular cleaning of 'touch points' or high contact areas to minimise the risk of spreading infection.” from the report
Clean premises
Inspectors found the premises visibly clean and tidy.
“The premises were visibly clean and tidy.” from the report
Other infection controls
Inspectors were assured about shielding, social distancing, safe admissions, outbreak management and the home's infection-control policy.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
PPE and training
needs fixingNot all staff used masks correctly. Eye protection was not readily available, and some newer staff had not completed infection-control training.
“Some of the newer members of staff had also yet to complete their infection prevention and control training.” from the report
Testing frequency
needs fixingTesting took place, but it was not always carried out as frequently as the guidance required.
“Staff and resident testing was routinely carried out but frequency of testing was not consistently in line with guidance.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThere was no registered manager for the service when inspectors visited.
“At the time of inspection there was no registered manager for this service.” from the report
- 01Have all staff now completed infection prevention and control training, including training on putting on and removing PPE?
- 02How do you make sure every staff member wears masks correctly and that eye protection is available when needed?
- 03How often are residents and staff tested now, and how do you check that testing follows current guidance?
- 04Who is currently managing the home, given that there was no registered manager at the inspection?
- 05How are visits with family and friends arranged and checked for safety?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures, and it did not rate the other four questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 February 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, February 2020
Taylor View and Gilbert Lodge was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, and said it was no longer in special measures.
Inspectors visited without notice on 28 January 2020. They spoke with people using the home and staff, reviewed care, medicine and staff records, and checked quality monitoring information.
The home supports up to 10 people with learning disabilities and autistic spectrum disorder. Five people were living there during the visit. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and supported to make choices, access healthcare and become more independent.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was a significant improvement from the previous Inadequate rating. The home had been in special measures, but inspectors said it was no longer Inadequate or in special measures.
Better risk management
Risk assessments had been reviewed and updated when people's needs changed. Staff could explain how risks were managed safely.
“Risks to people's safety were assessed, recorded and updated when people's needs changed.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
People spoke positively about staff. Inspectors found respectful relationships and appropriate reassurance when people needed it.
“People spoke positively about the support they received from the staff, who they described as kind and caring.” from the report
Choice and independence
People chose meals and activities, took part in cooking and cleaning, and were supported to develop skills and move towards greater independence.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Improved management
The registered manager had been in post for three months and had made improvements across the home. Quality and safety were checked through an effective monitoring system.
“There was an effective system in place to check on quality and safety in the service.” from the report
Some end of life plans were incomplete
needs fixingEnd of life care plans were not always fully completed. The manager said they would work with relatives to improve this.
“Care plans were in place for end of life care but weren't comprehensively completed as families did not always want to discuss this with younger people.” from the report
- 01How are end of life wishes recorded now, especially where families have not previously discussed them?
- 02What changes have been made since the inspection in January 2020?
- 03How are risk assessments updated when a person's needs or behaviour changes?
- 04How do you check that medicines are given correctly and that records are complete?
- 05How will you support my relative to develop independence and take part in activities they choose?
This inspection covered all five key questions and looked at both the two home buildings and the care provided; the previous inspection had only focused on Safe and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 February 2020 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 Taylor View and Gilbert Lodge
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Taylor View and Gilbert Lodge →
- February 2020Goodup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Taylor View and Gilbert Lodge →
- January 2020Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014Inspected but not rated
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 November 2010.
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
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
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. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
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.