CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Old Rectory Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm. Inspectors found suitable care plans and risk assessments, enough staff, safe medicines systems, infection controls and safeguarding processes. Some actions from a previous fire risk assessment were still outstanding.
- Effective?
- Good
- The report does not give a separate rating for Effective in this inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- The report does not give a separate rating for Caring in this inspection, although inspectors observed kind and respectful relationships.
- Responsive?
- Good
- The report does not give a separate rating for Responsive in this inspection, although inspectors noted improvements to care planning, activities and the mealtime experience.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The new management team had introduced an action plan and used quality checks to monitor and improve the service. People, relatives and staff said the management team was approachable and listened to feedback.
What inspectors found, July 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe care and strong recent improvements, but some fire safety actions were still outstanding.
Inspectors visited without notice on 28 June 2022. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff, and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment and quality records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and well-led were also rated Good. Inspectors found clear care plans, safe medicines management, enough staff, good infection control and suitable safeguarding arrangements.
A new management team had been in place since March 2022 and had made significant improvements after shortfalls identified by Norfolk County Council in February 2022. Some further improvements were still in progress, including actions from an earlier fire risk assessment.
The previous CQC rating was also Good, from 3 April 2019. This inspection was planned to check progress with the more recent shortfalls.
Clear care planning
Inspectors found that care plans and risk assessments contained the information staff needed. They had also been updated when people's needs changed.
“These documents had been updated when people's needs had changed.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were managed and given safely. Stock checks matched the medicines administration records, and staff had information about people's individual medicines needs.
“Medicines were managed and administered safely.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff available when people needed care and to spend time with them.
“This confirmed our observations that there were enough numbers of staff to meet people's care needs and spend time with them, engaging them in activity.” from the report
Strong recent improvement
The management team had acted on earlier shortfalls and had made significant improvements to care planning, management systems and mealtimes.
“In a short period of time, significant improvements had already been made compared to when Norfolk County Council visited in February 2022.” from the report
Open management
Inspectors found an open and positive culture. People could speak with managers, and feedback from people, relatives and staff was used to improve the service.
“There was a positive, open, transparent and empowering culture in the service.” from the report
Remaining fire safety actions
needs fixingSome actions from a fire risk assessment completed the previous year were still not finished. The most important actions had been completed, but the remaining work still needed oversight.
“Some improvements were still needed to address actions from a fire risk assessment completed the previous year.” from the report
- 01Which actions from the previous fire risk assessment are still outstanding, and when will each one be completed?
- 02How are you checking that the improvements introduced since February 2022 are being maintained?
- 03What further improvements to care planning and the mealtime experience are still in progress?
- 04How will you continue to involve residents and relatives in refurbishment and other service changes?
- 05How can relatives raise concerns, and how will the home show that those concerns have been acted on?
This was a planned inspection focused on progress with shortfalls identified by Norfolk County Council, and the report gives ratings for Safe and well-led only; the other key questions are not separately rated here. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 July 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 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found caring, safe and well-organised care, but cleanliness and food records needed attention.
This was an unannounced inspection on 3 and 5 April 2019. Two inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They reviewed care plans, safety records, audits and other information.
The inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and respect, and supported according to their needs and preferences. People were positive about the staff, food, activities and management. Medicines, risk assessments, staffing and care planning were found to be good.
There were two areas needing attention. Some equipment, furniture and kitchen areas were not clean on the first day. Food records did not always give full details for people at risk of losing weight. The home took immediate action on the cleanliness concerns.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings in all five areas. This was an improvement from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection, including improvements in safe, responsive and well-led care.
Kind and respectful care
People consistently described staff as caring. Inspectors saw pleasant interactions and found that staff respected privacy, dignity and independence.
“Without exception people were positive about living in the home, and felt staff were caring and met their needs.” from the report
Good medicines practice
Medicines were stored, given and recorded to a high standard. There were clear instructions for medicines given when needed.
“Medicines were stored, administered and clearly recorded to a high standard.” from the report
Personalised support and activities
Care plans recorded people's individual needs and preferences. People had a range of activities and could follow their interests with staff support.
“There was a weekly schedule for activities, such as making things for Easter, baking, flower arranging, games and going out to a café in the community.” from the report
Improved management and oversight
Quality checks and audits had improved since the previous inspection. The manager acted quickly when inspectors found issues and created an action plan.
“Governance systems had been improved since out last inspection, and there was increased oversight of the service from the provider.” from the report
Cleanliness was not consistent
needs fixingOn the first day, inspectors found some equipment, furniture and kitchen areas that were not clean. These areas had been dealt with by the second day, and new infection control checks and equipment were introduced.
“On the first day of the inspection visit, we found some equipment and furniture that had not been kept clean, in addition to the kitchen.” from the report
Food records were incomplete
needs fixingStaff did not always record full details of food provided to people at risk of weight loss. The manager said this would be addressed.
“We found staff did not always record full details of food provided when people were at risk of weight loss.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that the kitchen, furniture and care equipment remain clean every day?
- 02How are food and drink records completed for people at risk of weight loss?
- 03What further infection control training has been provided or planned for staff?
- 04How do you use care plan audits and the electronic care planning system to check that care is being delivered as planned?
- 05What improvements have been made to the home environment and room refurbishments since this inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection of the care home covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 April 2019 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 Old Rectory Care Home
5 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- July 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
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 £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
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.