CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Queens Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe, staffing levels were sufficient and recruitment checks were completed. Medicines were administered safely, but records of medicine stock were not clear.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and support. People's health, nutrition, consent and mobility needs were assessed and monitored.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Staff knew people well, supported independence and respected privacy, dignity and personal choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and covered routines, communication and preferences. People had activities, opportunities to give feedback and support with end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had clear responsibilities, approachable management and regular quality checks. However, accidents and incidents were not analysed regularly or in enough detail to identify patterns.
What inspectors found, January 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records and building maintenance needing improvement.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 6 December 2018. They spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They reviewed care files, medicines records, staff files, training, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments and safe medicines practice. People said staff were kind, and care plans reflected people's needs and preferences.
There were some improvements still needed. Records did not clearly show the amount of medicine stock held for each person. Accident and incident information was not analysed regularly or in enough detail. Some paintwork and door frames also needed attention.
The overall Good rating means the inspectors found the service met the relevant standards at the time of this inspection. The rating was unchanged from the previous inspection.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, and call bells were answered promptly during the visit.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to keep people safe and call bells were responded to by staff during the inspection in a timely manner.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives consistently described staff as kind and caring. Staff knew people well and supported their dignity and independence.
“People who used the service told us that staff were kind and caring.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's routines, life histories, preferences and communication needs, and were reviewed regularly.
“We found each person's documentation was personalised to their individual needs.” from the report
Activities and choice
People could choose how to spend their day and had access to a varied programme of activities and social opportunities.
“Activities on offer included quizzes, exercises, singing, cinema nights and reminiscence.” from the report
Good management systems
Inspectors found clear responsibilities, regular quality checks and evidence that improvements identified through checks were acted on.
“Systems and procedures were in place to monitor and assess the quality of the service.” from the report
Medicine stock records
needs fixingMedicines were given safely, but inspectors could not see a clear record of how much stock was held for the people checked. The home said it would introduce these records.
“We were unable to see a clear record of the amount of stock held at the service for the people we checked.” from the report
Accident analysis
needs fixingAccidents and incidents were recorded, but the home was not regularly reviewing them in enough detail to spot themes or patterns. The home agreed to evaluate them more often.
“Although the registered manager had oversight of accidents and incidents they did not analyse these regularly, or in detail to identify any themes or patterns.” from the report
Paintwork and door frames
minorThe home was clean and tidy, but some skirting boards, doors and door frames needed attention. The home said this would be addressed within six months.
“We noted that some areas of the home needed attention such as paintwork on skirting boards, doors, and door frames.” from the report
- 01What records do you now keep to show the medicine stock held for each person?
- 02How do you now review accidents and incidents to identify repeated problems or patterns?
- 03Was the promised work to the paintwork, doors and door frames completed within six months?
- 04How are people's individual routines, communication needs and end of life wishes kept up to date?
- 05How do people and relatives make complaints, and what has changed as a result of recent feedback?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 January 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 Queens Residential Care Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The Queens Residential Care Home →
- July 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 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
16 live-in carers within about an hour of East Riding of Yorkshire
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 £1,420 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
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.