CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Cottage
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines practice, effective risk management and good infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The home had a positive and open culture, and managers used audits and staff learning to improve support. However, the provider had not resolved identified environmental repairs and refurbishment in a timely way.
What inspectors found, January 2024
Rated Good overall, but inspectors found leadership Requires Improvement because environmental repairs were not dealt with promptly.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 29 November and 5 December 2023. One inspector observed care, spoke with family members, managers and staff, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicine arrangements, suitable risk assessments and good safeguarding practice. People were supported in a way that protected their choices and independence.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement, as it was at the previous inspection. Repairs and refurbishment had been reported but were still waiting for dates, including holes, damaged decoration and mould. This was a breach of Regulation 17 on good governance.
The overall rating stayed Good. The inspection only assessed Safe and Well-led. The other question ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's assessed needs. Recruitment checks and training were in place.
“The provider ensured there were sufficient numbers of suitable staff.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans reflected people's goals, communication needs and preferences. Staff helped people retain control over their daily lives.
“Support was person-centred and promoted people's individuality, well-being and dignity.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff were trained and assessed as competent to give medicines. Records showed medicines were given as prescribed.
“Medicines records showed people received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Open culture
People, families and staff were involved in the home. Inspectors found positive relationships and good communication with relatives and outside professionals.
“There was a positive and open culture at the service.” from the report
Unresolved repairs
seriousThe provider had not acted quickly enough on environmental problems reported as early as January 2023. Inspectors found holes, damaged decoration and mould in parts of the home.
“The provider's systems remained ineffective in responding to and resolving identified issues within the environment in timely manner.” from the report
- 01Have all the reported repairs and refurbishment work now been completed, including the bathroom holes, damaged toilet sealing, dining room decoration and mould?
- 02What dates and checks are now in place to make sure environmental problems are dealt with promptly?
- 03What action have you taken in response to the Regulation 17 breach, and what evidence can you show that the action plan is complete?
- 04How do you maintain the current full complement of permanent staff?
- 05How do you involve families in reviewing support plans and people's goals?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other question ratings were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 January 2024 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, August 2018
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care, but management checks and planned repairs needed improvement.
This was a comprehensive, unannounced inspection on 5 June 2018. Inspectors observed care, spoke with staff and relatives, and reviewed care records, staffing, training and quality checks. Nine people were living in the home, which can support up to ten people.
The home remained Good overall. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, medicines were handled safely, staff supported people's health and choices, and care was kind and personalised. People had access to activities, community facilities and healthcare.
The well-led rating fell from Good to Requires Improvement. Checks were being completed but did not always lead to action. A bathroom floor needing replacement remained unfinished, refurbishment was behind schedule, and there were not enough permanent staff to cover all required hours, although there were enough staff on duty during the inspection.
Safe medicines support
Inspectors observed medicines being given safely and in line with people's preferences. Records and staff competency checks were in place.
“Medicine administration records (MAR) were completed according to the provider's policy.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People appeared comfortable and relaxed. Staff gave people time, respected their private space and offered emotional support.
“People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion and they were given emotional support when needed.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's needs, wishes and communication methods. Activities could change according to what people preferred on the day.
“Care plans were regularly reviewed to make sure that they accurately reflected people's changing needs and wishes.” from the report
Support for health and nutrition
People were supported to eat and drink enough and to attend appointments with healthcare professionals. Staff knew about specific dietary needs.
“People had access to healthcare services so that they received on-going healthcare support.” from the report
Positive staff culture
Staff said they could raise concerns and would be taken seriously. The home worked with other services and professionals to support people.
“There was a positive culture in the service that was focused upon achieving good outcomes for people.” from the report
Permanent staffing gaps
needs fixingThere were 204 vacant staff hours. Agency staff were used and some staff were working excessive hours, although inspectors found enough staff on duty during the visit.
“there was not enough staff employed on a permanent basis to cover the required number of hours needed to care for people safely and effectively.” from the report
Poor follow-through on improvements
needs fixingQuality checks identified problems, but actions did not always have completion dates or get finished. This reduced the effectiveness of the home's monitoring systems.
“Checks on the quality of the service were not consistently effective.” from the report
Unfinished repairs
needs fixingThe bathroom floor had dirt and slime ingrained in it and was beginning to split. Its replacement had been on the refurbishment plan since September 2017 but had not been completed.
“the flooring was ingrained with dirt / slime and beginning to split in the corners.” from the report
Refurbishment behind schedule
needs fixingOther parts of the home also needed attention, including specialist chairs and storage of equipment. Inspectors said the delays affected people's daily living and care experience.
“Refurbishment plans were not on schedule, which impacted on people's day to day living and their experience of care.” from the report
- 01Have the 204 vacant staff hours been filled, and how many agency or overtime hours are currently being used?
- 02Has the bathroom floor been replaced, and what date was this work completed?
- 03What system now makes sure every quality-check action has an owner and a completion date?
- 04Which other refurbishment actions from the 2017 plan remain unfinished?
- 05How are people living in the home involved in decisions and in giving feedback about the service?
This was a comprehensive, unannounced inspection covering all five quality areas, including observations, discussions with staff and relatives, and reviews of care and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 August 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 The Cottage
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2024Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 December 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Lincolnshire
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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.