CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Old Vicarage Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, robust recruitment checks, updated risk assessments and safe medicines administration. They noted that lockable cupboards for some skin creams were not yet in place, and allergies had not previously been prominent enough in records.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training, supervision and induction arrangements. People received support with nutrition, health appointments and decisions about their care, including mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions where needed.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors observed kind, respectful and patient care. Staff knew people well, supported independence and maintained privacy, dignity and relationships with relatives and friends.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were person-centred and regularly reviewed. People were offered activities, choices about food and support suited to their routines, interests, cultural needs and preferences.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a registered manager, regular audits, staff meetings and systems for gathering feedback. Audits were used to identify actions and plan improvements.
What inspectors found, June 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a few minor improvements made during the visit.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 30 April and 1 May 2018. The inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff, managers and health professionals. They reviewed care plans, staff files, rotas and other records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines management, updated risk assessments, good training and appropriate links with health professionals.
People and relatives were positive about the care. Staff were described as kind, patient and knowledgeable about people's needs. Care plans and daily records gave staff detailed guidance, and people were offered choices about food, activities and how they spent their time.
The previous inspection in July 2015 found a breach about missing information on people's individual needs. Inspectors found that this had been improved and the requirement was now met. Some smaller issues were identified and action was taken during or after the inspection.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Inspectors saw staff offering reassurance, encouragement and personal care in a respectful way.
“We observed people being treated with kindness, respect and compassion.” from the report
Staff knew people well
The home had a consistent staff team who understood people's preferences and how they wanted to be supported.
“Staff knew people they supported well and were able to describe what they like to do and how they liked to be supported.” from the report
Detailed care information
Care plans included people's routines, life histories, preferences and support needs. Daily records helped staff provide consistent care between shifts.
“People's care plans were person centred and gave staff relevant information on their life stories and what was important to them.” from the report
Good activities and choices
People could choose from a range of activities and were supported to take part if they wished. They also had choices about meals.
“People were supported on a regular basis to participate in meaningful activities.” from the report
Active quality checks
The management team used audits, meetings and feedback to identify improvements. Inspectors found that actions were followed up.
“The audits were used to develop action plans to address any shortfalls and plan improvements to the service.” from the report
Storage of prescribed creams
needs fixingSome people's skin creams did not have lockable cupboards in their bedrooms when inspectors visited. The provider said these would be installed immediately.
“We saw that people who used specific creams for their skin did not have lockable cupboards for them in their bed rooms.” from the report
Allergy information
minorAllergies were recorded, but inspectors felt the information was not prominent enough. The manager moved allergy information to the front of care and medical records during the inspection.
“People's allergies were recorded but were not as prominent as they could be.” from the report
End-of-life records
needs fixingThe home provided end-of-life care, but inspectors said documentation and recording of people's wishes still needed improvement.
“All staff were trained in end of life care and this was an area that the service was looking to make improvements with their documentation and recording of people's wishes.” from the report
- 01Have lockable cupboards now been installed for people's skin creams, and how are creams checked and stored?
- 02How is allergy information displayed so that all staff can see it quickly?
- 03How are people's end-of-life wishes recorded, reviewed and shared with the staff team?
- 04How often are care plans and risk assessments reviewed if a person's needs change?
- 05How do you use feedback, complaints and audits to make improvements?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating; it also checked that the breach identified in 2015 had been addressed. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 June 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 Old Vicarage Residential Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The Old Vicarage Residential Home →
- August 2015Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2014Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Gloucestershire
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 £1,030 to £1,360 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.