CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Old School House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, November 2019
The Old School House was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with the home larger than current best practice guidance.
This was an unannounced inspection carried out over three visits in September and October 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, staff, relatives and health professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, recruitment information and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were treated with dignity, supported to make choices and helped to take part in activities and community life.
The home supported 18 younger adults with autism, learning disabilities and sensory impairment. It was larger than current best practice guidance, but inspectors said it was split into three units of up to six people and that the building design reduced any negative impact.
The overall Good rating means inspectors found a consistent standard of care and management at the time of this inspection. The rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published on 5 April 2017.
Personalised support
Staff knew people's individual communication methods, preferences and routines. Support was arranged around each person's choices and needs.
“People were treated as individuals and were valued and respected.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were received, stored, given and disposed of safely. Staff were trained and checked as competent before administering medicines.
“Medicines were safely managed. Safe protocols for the receipt, storage, administration and disposal of medicines were followed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw people looking calm and relaxed around staff. Staff protected privacy, dignity and independence.
“Staff respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Community life
People were supported to take part in activities, maintain relationships and attend events in the local community.
“People were encouraged and supported to take part in activities both in the home and in the local community.” from the report
Strong management
The report describes an open management approach, positive staff morale and systems that used feedback and incidents to improve care.
“There were effective systems in place to manage the quality of the service and drive improvements.” from the report
The home is larger than best practice guidance
minorThe home was registered for 18 people, which is larger than current best practice guidance for learning disability services. Inspectors said it was divided into three units of up to six people and that the design reduced any negative impact.
“The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties.” from the report
- 01How do the three separate units work in practice, and how do you make sure the home's overall size does not affect people?
- 02How are restrictive interventions used, and how do you ensure they are only used as a last resort?
- 03How will you support my relative's individual communication needs, including when they see health professionals?
- 04How will my relative be involved in choosing their routines, activities, room arrangements and care?
- 05How can families receive updates and raise concerns if they are unhappy with the care?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, the premises and care provided, and included a review of restrictive interventions; all five ratings were unchanged from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 November 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.
What inspectors found, April 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some radiator safety and incident-recording issues to check.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 23 February 2017. Inspectors reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files, training and quality checks. They spoke with relatives, staff and visiting professionals, and observed care.
The home supported up to 18 people with learning disabilities or autism, with 17 people living there at the time. Inspectors could not speak directly with residents because of their communication differences, but they observed staff supporting people and gathered views from others.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection in October 2014.
Inspectors found caring staff, personalised support plans, safe medicines practice and suitable staffing. They also noted that some radiators were not covered and that records of actions after one incident had not always been complete. Temporary safety measures and improvements to the systems were in place.
Kind and respectful staff
Staff were described as caring and compassionate. Inspectors saw staff reassuring people, respecting privacy and responding to their wishes.
“People were supported by staff who were kind and compassionate.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans included people's preferences, backgrounds, communication methods and activities. Staff understood this guidance and used it in practice.
“People's support plans were centred on them as individuals.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored safely and records checked by inspectors were accurate. Staff received training and competency checks.
“People received their prescribed medicines in ways they preferred.” from the report
Good communication
Staff used different communication methods, including signing, personal signs and communication passports, to help people understand and express choices.
“People received the information they required in ways that were meaningful to them.” from the report
Family relationships
Relatives were involved in care planning and were made welcome. The home supported visits and other important relationships.
“People were supported to maintain relationships that were important to them.” from the report
Uncovered radiators
needs fixingSome radiators were not covered. Inspectors identified a risk that someone could fall against a hot surface, although temporary measures were used and the manager said the work would be completed by April 2017.
“We saw that some radiators were not covered.” from the report
Incident follow-up records
needs fixingThe local authority had asked the provider to give fuller details of actions taken after an incident because this had not always happened. The report says the home had taken action to improve its systems.
“The local authority had asked the provider to detail all actions they had taken following an incident as on occasion this had not always occurred.” from the report
Outstanding statutory notifications
minorThe manager was still submitting some notifications about local authority authorisations involving deprivation of liberty. The report says the conditions of registration were met.
“The registered manager told us that they were currently in the process of submitting some statutory notifications.” from the report
- 01Were all the uncovered radiators covered by April 2017, and what checks are now made to prevent this risk?
- 02How do you record and review every action taken after an accident or incident?
- 03Which people currently have Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisations, and how are any conditions followed?
- 04How will you support my relative's individual communication needs and make sure their communication passport stays up to date?
- 05How are relatives involved in reviewing support plans when a person's needs or preferences change?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, and the previous Good ratings were checked again. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 April 2017 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 School House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leicestershire
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. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“Together Earther and I supported her to die at home with great dignity and compassion and him to continue with life.”
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.