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.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe and staff understood safeguarding responsibilities. Medicine records, recruitment checks, risk assessments, staffing levels and infection control arrangements were checked and found satisfactory.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training, regular supervision and annual appraisals. People were supported with their health, diet, consent and legal safeguards.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw kind, patient and respectful interactions. Staff knew people's histories, preferences and support needs, and respected privacy and dignity.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support plans were detailed, personalised and reviewed regularly. People had access to activities, outings and holidays, and there was an accessible complaints process.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and deputy manager were described as approachable and supportive. Audits and surveys were used to monitor the service, although inspectors recommended that staff meetings should be held more often.
What inspectors found, July 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with more frequent staff meetings recommended.
This was an announced inspection on 9 July 2018. One inspector spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and the manager. They also observed care, looked around the home and checked support plans, medicine records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people felt safe, staff were kind and respectful, medicines were managed safely, and support was based on people's individual needs and choices.
The previous inspection found a breach about staff appraisals. This had been put right by this inspection. Inspectors recommended that staff meetings should happen more often, but found no serious risks or concerns.
People felt safe
People and their relatives said they felt safe. Staff had safeguarding training and understood how to report concerns.
“People told us they liked living at The Old School House and they felt safe with their support workers.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw friendly, respectful care. Staff knew people well and paid attention to their wellbeing and communication.
“We saw in all cases people were cared for by staff who were kind, patient and respectful.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans included people's interests, communication, preferences and goals. People and their families had been involved in creating them.
“The plans focussed on promoting independence.” from the report
Safe medicines systems
Medicine records were complete and matched the medicines held. Staff were trained and medicine audits were carried out.
“We checked three peoples medication administration records (MAR.) These had been fully completed.” from the report
Staff meetings were not frequent
minorRecords showed only two staff meetings in 2017 and one in 2018. Inspectors recommended more frequent meetings so staff could share information and discuss team working and service development.
“We recommend staff meetings are held more frequently, to share team working, information and service development.” from the report
- 01How often are staff meetings now held, and how are important updates shared between meetings?
- 02How is the manager's time divided between this home and the two other homes they manage?
- 03How often are support plans reviewed, and how will my relative and our family be involved?
- 04How are medicine records and medicine competence checked now?
- 05What activities and outings would be available for my relative, based on their interests and communication needs?
This was an announced inspection covering all five CQC questions, although the report used a shorter format because the overall rating remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 July 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.
What inspectors found, August 2017
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but staff appraisals needed improvement and the service breached staffing rules.
Inspectors visited on 19 July 2017, with 48 hours' notice. They spoke with all four people living in the home, two relatives or friends and five staff. They observed daily care and checked care records, staff files, training records, medicines and management checks.
The home was rated Good for being safe, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, personalised support plans, meaningful activities and warm relationships between people and staff.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for being effective. Three staff files showed that annual appraisals had not been completed as required. This was a breach of Regulation 18 on staffing. Inspectors also noted stained or marked kitchen surfaces, with a deep clean planned.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were securely stored, correctly recorded and administered by trained staff.
“We found systems were in place to make sure people received their medicines safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and treated them with patience and respect. People were involved in decisions and their privacy and dignity were maintained.
“We saw in all cases people were cared for by staff that were kind, patient and respectful.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans described people's preferences, interests and the best way to support them. People and their relatives or friends were involved in developing the plans.
“The support plans seen contained information about the person's preferences and identified how they would like their care and support to be delivered.” from the report
Activities and independence
People took part in a wide range of activities, including cycling, bowling, swimming, meals out and shopping. These activities supported choice and independence.
“We saw people participated in such things as, cycling club, bowling, swimming and meals out at pubs and restaurants.” from the report
Open management
Staff said communication and teamwork were good. Inspectors found quality checks, monitoring visits and regular opportunities for people, relatives and staff to give their views.
“Staff said both managers were approachable and supportive.” from the report
Missed staff appraisals
seriousThree staff files showed that annual appraisals had not been completed in the previous 12 months. One recorded appraisal was from 2015, another from 2012 and one file had no appraisal record.
“Some staff had not been provided with an annual appraisal for development and support.” from the report
Kitchen cleanliness
minorInspectors found stained or marked grouting and flooring in the domestic kitchen. The manager said a deep clean was planned for the following week.
“We did see some of the grouting around the wall tiles and the linoleum floor in the domestic type kitchen were stained/marked.” from the report
- 01Have all staff now received the annual appraisals required by the provider's policy?
- 02How do you monitor that staff appraisals and development reviews are completed on time?
- 03Was the planned deep clean of the kitchen completed, and how is kitchen cleanliness checked now?
- 04How are people supported to make choices about activities, meals, healthcare and access to the kitchen?
- 05How often are support plans, medicines records and safety checks audited, and what happens when an issue is found?
This was an announced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the home; the previous inspection on 10 July 2015 had rated the service Good overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 August 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 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 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 24 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
90 live-in carers within about an hour of Sheffield
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 £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 76 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.”
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
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.