CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Terry Yorath House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and appropriate COVID-19 safety arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 February 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found the premises were clean. Staff used appropriate personal protective equipment, testing arrangements followed government guidance, and infection control audits were in place.
The home supported people to keep in touch with family and friends. Inspectors were assured about visiting, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing and managing possible outbreaks.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall rating or ratings for the other four questions.
Clean premises
The building was clean, with hand sanitisers, PPE stations and clear infection prevention signs throughout.
“The premises were clean. Hand sanitisers and personal protective equipment (PPE) stations were situated throughout the building.” from the report
Staff used PPE
Staff were seen wearing appropriate PPE. One person told inspectors they felt well looked after.
“Staff were observed wearing appropriate PPE. One person said, "The staff wear masks all the time here. We are very well looked after.” from the report
Family contact
Staff helped people maintain links with their families and friends during the pandemic.
“Staff ensured people using the service could maintain links with family members and friends.” from the report
Testing and audits
The home had arrangements for regular COVID-19 testing and carried out infection control audits.
“The service had robust infection control auditing systems in place.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people and staff tested for infections now?
- 02How do staff use PPE and support visitors to prevent infections?
- 03How are people helped to keep in touch with family and friends?
- 04What risk assessments are in place for people who may be particularly affected by infections?
- 05How would the home manage an infection outbreak, and how often are infection control arrangements audited?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, recorded under Safe; the service was inspected but not rated and the other questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 March 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.
What inspectors found, March 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some staffing and medicines guidance issues addressed during the inspection.
Inspectors carried out a comprehensive inspection on 23 and 26 February 2018. The first day was unannounced. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff, and checked care plans, medicines records, training, recruitment, safety records and quality checks.
The home provides permanent and short-stay places for adults with profound physical disabilities. Inspectors found that people felt safe and were supported by kind, skilled staff. Care was personalised, people were involved in decisions, and their health, food and social needs were supported.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. The overall Good rating stayed the same as at the previous inspection. Inspectors found no serious risks or concerns from this inspection or their ongoing monitoring.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw patient, attentive support and good communication with people who had communication difficulties.
“We saw staff treated people as equal partners which showed how much they valued people who used the service.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's histories, preferences, interests and support needs. People helped develop their plans and staff knew how each person wanted to be supported.
“People's care plans were person centred because they contained information about their life history; who and what mattered to them and their hobbies and interests.” from the report
Skilled and supported staff
Staff training was up to date and included support specific to people's needs. Staff received induction, supervision and appraisal.
“Staff training was up to date and staff received support to carry out their roles through supervision and appraisal.” from the report
Good quality monitoring
Managers carried out regular checks on medicines, care records, cleanliness, finances and safety. Action plans were used when checks found improvements were needed.
“There was an effective quality assurance system in place. This meant the service was continually improving.” from the report
Staffing pressure
needs fixingPeople said staff were busy and more staff were needed. Night staffing had been increased and daytime recruitment had started to support one-to-one time and outings.
“We could do with more staff, they have to work extremely hard.” from the report
Medicines guidance
needs fixingSome guidance for medicines given when needed, or for creams, did not give enough personalised information. The manager acted during the inspection to update records or clarify instructions.
“Some guidance for these medicines was in place but needed more personalisation regarding people's individual needs for these medicines.” from the report
Fewer weekend activities
minorOne person said there was not enough to do at weekends and that a lack of staff had stopped some outings. The manager said the staffing increase would help expand activities.
“Group activities are thin on the ground, we used to go to the pub, but the lack of staff has stopped this.” from the report
- 01How has the increase in night staffing and planned daytime recruitment changed the support people receive?
- 02Are there now enough staff to provide one-to-one support and regular outings, including at weekends?
- 03How are medicines given when needed recorded, and how do you make sure the guidance is personalised for each person?
- 04How are people involved in reviewing their care plans when their needs or preferences change?
- 05How do people and relatives raise concerns, and what changes have been made in response to recent feedback?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the first day unannounced; all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 March 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 Terry Yorath House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 April 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 Leeds
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 £1,250 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.