CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Spires
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, September 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind and effective care, but medicines and quality checks were not reliable enough.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 31 July and 1 August 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. They also observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good for effective, caring and responsive care. People were supported by trained staff who knew them well. Inspectors found respectful care, choice around food and activities, access to health professionals, and support to maintain relationships and independence.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for safe and well-led care. One person was given an antibiotic for eight days after the prescription had ended. Records for medicines, care needs and best-interest decisions were not always complete or up to date.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. The report says this meant some aspects were not always safe, there was limited assurance about safety, and management and leadership were inconsistent. This was the home's first inspection.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors found that staff treated people with compassion, understood them well and supported their dignity, choices and independence.
“People were supported by caring and respectful staff who encouraged people to remain independent.” from the report
Training and health support
Staff had induction, training, supervision and appraisals. People could also access professionals such as physiotherapists and district nurses.
“Staff completed a comprehensive induction and training to help them effectively meet people's needs.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were offered varied activities in the home and wider community. The home also supported contact with relatives and community involvement.
“People had access to a varied range of activities such as visits to the local garden centre and shops, keep fit, school and nursery visits.” from the report
Listening to feedback
The home sought views from people, relatives and staff, and displayed examples of actions taken in response to suggestions.
“We saw 'You said, We did' boards displayed where actions had been taken in response to people's suggestions.” from the report
Medicines were not always given safely
seriousAn antibiotic was given for eight days after the prescription had ended, which placed the person at risk of harm. Medicines records did not always contain the information needed for as-required medicines or show medicine balances consistently.
“During our inspection we found one example where staff wrongly administered an antibiotic to a person for eight days following the person's prescription ending.” from the report
Care records were incomplete
needs fixingSome care files did not contain current information about people's needs. Inspectors also found that best-interest decisions and some required monitoring had not always been recorded.
“People's care files did not always contain up to date information about their needs.” from the report
Quality checks did not find problems
seriousThe home's audits failed to identify important gaps in care records and medicines management. Inspectors said the systems were not robust enough to show that quality and safety were being managed effectively.
“Systems were either not in place or robust enough to demonstrate quality and safety was effectively managed.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to ensure medicines are always given exactly as prescribed?
- 02How are as-required medicines protocols and medicine balances now checked?
- 03How do you make sure care plans contain the latest advice from dieticians and other professionals?
- 04How are best-interest decisions recorded and checked?
- 05What evidence can you show that the quality checks identified and fixed the problems found in this inspection?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and was the first inspection of the newly registered service. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 September 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 Spires
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- September 2019Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 July 2018.
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 Staffordshire
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 £1,230 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.