CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Spinney Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including PPE, testing, cleaning, visitor screening and managing outbreaks. The provider also said it had measures to reduce the risks from COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control and no harmful impact from staffing pressures.
This was a targeted, announced inspection on 10 February 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, and on whether staffing pressures affected care.
Inspectors found safe processes during the outbreak. The home used testing, screening, personal protective equipment and cleaning procedures. Staff were observed using protective equipment correctly, and the home was supporting visits under the guidance in place at the time.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide an overall quality rating or new ratings for all five areas of care.
Outbreak arrangements
Inspectors found that the home had safe processes and had taken appropriate action during the COVID-19 outbreak.
“We found safe processes were in place and appropriate action had been taken during the outbreak.” from the report
PPE and hand hygiene
The manager checked staff practice, and inspectors saw staff using protective equipment correctly.
“The registered manager conducted regular checks to ensure staff were following the correct procedures when donning and doffing their personal protective equipment and performing hand washing.” from the report
Clean environment
The home had cleaning arrangements to sanitise all areas regularly.
“The home was clean and hygienic. Cleaning protocols were in place to ensure all areas of the building were regularly sanitised.” from the report
Healthcare support
The home had working relationships with healthcare professionals, whose support continued during the pandemic.
“The service had established good working relationships with relevant healthcare professionals and their support continued during the pandemic.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you maintaining the infection prevention and control arrangements described in this report?
- 02How do you check that staff are using personal protective equipment and following hand-washing procedures correctly?
- 03How are people living here and staff tested for infections now?
- 04How do you manage staffing pressures so they do not affect people's care?
- 05What arrangements are currently in place for visitors and visiting professionals?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and staffing pressures; it did not provide an overall rating or assess the other key questions in detail. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 March 2022 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, January 2019
The Spinney Residential Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some people sometimes waiting for help.
This was an unannounced inspection over 4 and 11 December 2018. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed the home and dining experience, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training and quality checks.
The home was found to be safe and well managed. Medicines and risks were managed properly, staffing was sufficient overall, and staff knew how to protect people from harm. People received suitable food, healthcare support and care based on their preferences.
People described kind and respectful relationships with staff. Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. All five areas were rated Good, which was the same overall rating as at the previous inspection published in June 2016.
Safe care
Inspectors found effective systems to protect people from harm. Risks and medicines were checked and managed, and lessons were taken from accidents and incidents.
“People were safe and protected from avoidable harm.” from the report
Skilled and consistent staff
Most staff had worked at the home for many years. New staff received induction, shadowing and training before working independently.
“This created a consistent staff team.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw staff treating people with warmth and patience. People had positive relationships with staff who understood their preferences.
“Throughout the inspection we saw many examples of staff responding to people with kindness and patience.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's preferences, interests and support needs. People and relatives were involved in planning and reviewing care.
“Care plans took account of people's likes, dislikes and preferences.” from the report
Strong management
The home had quality checks, an open culture and ways for people, relatives and staff to give feedback. Feedback was used to make changes.
“The service was consistently managed and well-led.” from the report
Occasional waits for help
minorSome people said staff were busy and that they sometimes had to wait when they asked for assistance. Inspectors still found staffing levels sufficient overall.
“People told us staff were busy and at times they had to wait when they requested assistance.” from the report
Activities organised by care staff
minorThere was no dedicated activity coordinator. Care staff arranged activities and entertainment, and inspectors reported that people and relatives felt there was enough to do.
“The service did not have a dedicated activity coordinator so staff ensured that a range of activities and entertainment for people was planned and facilitated.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure people do not wait too long when they ask for help?
- 02How are activities planned and provided when there is no dedicated activity coordinator?
- 03How will you match my relative's preferences, interests and communication needs in their care plan?
- 04How are medicines checked and what happens if an error is found?
- 05How will you involve my relative and our family in care reviews and decisions?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home environment. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 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 Spinney Residential Home
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at The Spinney Residential Home →
- January 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The Spinney Residential Home →
- June 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2015InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: GoodResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leeds
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 £1,250 a week. 89 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.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.