CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Paddocks
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but staffing, care planning and involvement in reviews needed further attention.
This was a planned inspection on 13 August 2019. One inspector looked at the home, its records and medicines, staff recruitment and supervision, and how it was managed. They spoke with one person and six staff members, and also sought information from other organisations.
The home supported seven people with learning disabilities or mental health conditions. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with dignity and supported by staff who understood their needs. Medicines were handled safely, people received health care and people were supported with activities, choice and independence.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors made recommendations about staffing levels, training, involvement in care reviews, communication information and care planning. They also noted that concerns about infection control and cleanliness across the wider campus were being addressed.
Staff knew people well
Inspectors found that staff understood people's individual needs, personalities and preferences. People appeared happy and well cared for.
“People were effectively supported by staff and staff members had a good understanding of people's care needs, their personalities and preferences.” from the report
Safe medicines support
The home had checks to make sure medicines were available and given correctly.
“Checks were carried out to ensure sufficient stocks were available and medicines had been administered appropriately.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make day-to-day decisions, develop skills and access activities in the home, on the wider site and in the local community.
“People were supported to access the local community and participate in a range of activities at the home and the wider campus.” from the report
Quality checks
The home used audits and checks and worked with the local authority and other services on improvements.
“There was evidence of a range of audits and checks being carried out at the service.” from the report
Staffing levels
needs fixingRecruitment difficulties meant agency and bank staff were used regularly. Staff raised concerns about fewer staff on afternoon shifts, so inspectors recommended continued review of staffing levels.
“We recommend the provider continue to review staffing levels to ensure that there are sufficient staff to actively support people using the service.” from the report
Care reviews
needs fixingThere was limited evidence that people had meaningful opportunities to be involved in reviews of their care. Review documents were not in easy-read or alternative formats.
“There was limited evidence people had been given meaningful opportunity to be involved in care reviews.” from the report
Complicated care plans
needs fixingCare plans were very detailed and sometimes difficult for staff to oversee. New, simpler plans were being introduced.
“Plans were extremely detailed and were often over complicated and long, meaning it was difficult for staff to maintain an overview of the care.” from the report
Accessible information
minorStaff understood people's communication needs, but information about direct care was often detailed written material. Inspectors recommended improving access to information.
“There was some easy read information available within the service, although material related to direct care issues tended to be detailed written information.” from the report
Wider campus cleanliness
needs fixingA local authority review had raised concerns about infection control and cleanliness across the campus. The provider was working on an action plan, and inspectors found no serious cleanliness concerns in the home on the inspection day.
“A local authority review of the service had raised concerns about infection control and cleanliness of service across the campus facility.” from the report
- 01How have you maintained staffing levels, particularly on afternoon shifts, since the inspection?
- 02Have the new care plan formats been introduced, and are they easier for staff and families to follow?
- 03How can residents take part in care reviews, and what easy-read or alternative information is available?
- 04What changes have been made to NAPPI and positive behaviour support training, and how do you check its results?
- 05What progress has been made on the action plan for infection control and cleanliness across the campus?
This was a planned comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care, with limited direct feedback because only one person spoke with the inspector. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 October 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, February 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, and the home had maintained its previous Good rating.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 1 February 2017. One inspector spoke with six people living in the home, three relatives and staff. They also reviewed care records, medicines, staff files, complaints and quality checks.
The inspectors found enough safely recruited staff, safe medicines arrangements and suitable plans to reduce risks. People received suitable training, healthcare, food and drink. Staff supported people's choices, privacy, dignity, routines and communication needs.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection also rated the home Good, so the report says this rating had been maintained.
Choice and control
Staff supported people to make everyday decisions and used communication methods they could understand. The report also found that support was provided in the least restrictive way possible.
“People were supported to have as much choice and control over their lives as they were able to.” from the report
Safe medicines
The home had arrangements for ordering, storing, giving and disposing of medicines. Records showed that all medicines checked had been given at the prescribed times.
“There were reliable arrangements in place for the ordering, storage, administration and disposal of medicines.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff being patient, gentle and attentive. Staff supported privacy, personal appearance and people's preferred routines.
“Staff displayed a kind and caring approach in all their interactions with people.” from the report
Personalised activities
People had activity plans based on their hobbies, social interests and independence. Inspectors saw people supported in line with these plans.
“People had individual activity plans which took account of their social preferences and hobbies.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider and manager carried out checks on medicines, staff skills, records, the home and vehicles. Action plans were used when checks found areas to address.
“Quality checks had been completed to ensure people received safe and reliable support.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you make sure staffing levels continue to meet each person's individual support needs?
- 02How do you check that medicines, including occasional medicines, are given in line with each person's care plan?
- 03What new social activities are being considered as part of the review of activities?
- 04How will you involve the person, their relatives and health professionals when their care plan is reviewed?
- 05How can a person who cannot use the usual complaints procedure share a concern?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five rating areas, and the home was rated Good in each one. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 February 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 Paddocks
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 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.