Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at The Terrace

Requires improvementpublished 27 July 2026, 2 months ago

Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, March 2021

Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place.

This was an announced, targeted inspection on 4 March 2021. It focused on how the home was preventing and controlling COVID-19 infection.

Inspectors were assured that visitors were checked, PPE was used safely, testing was available, and cleaning and social distancing were in place. The home also had procedures for safe visiting and supporting people's contact with relatives.

The inspection did not give an overall quality rating. Safe was recorded as inspected but not rated, and the other four areas were not assessed in this report.

What inspectors praised
  • Visitor safety

    Essential visitors had to use PPE, provide NHS Track and Trace information, show a negative COVID-19 test and have their temperature checked before entering.

    “All essential visitors had to wear appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
  • Safe family visits

    Relatives could have organised visits in a designated indoor visiting pod, with cleaning procedures in place.

    “People were supported to receive organised visits from relatives in a designated safe indoor 'visiting pod' area with robust cleaning procedures in place.” from the report
  • Clean environment

    The home carried out and recorded extra cleaning, including cleaning of frequently touched surfaces and deep cleaning when needed.

    “The home was clean and additional cleaning of all areas and frequent touch surfaces was in place and being carried out and recorded regularly by housekeeping staff.” from the report
  • Support for wellbeing

    Activities were adapted into smaller groups, and staff helped people use technology to keep in touch with relatives and friends.

    “Staff supported people to use other technology for making video calls to their families and friends.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What visitor checks, testing and PPE arrangements are in place now?
  2. 02How often are high-touch surfaces cleaned and how is this recorded?
  3. 03How does the home keep its infection prevention and control policy up to date?
  4. 04What activities and ways of keeping in touch with relatives are available now?
  5. 05Can you show me the latest full CQC ratings for the home, as this inspection was not a full service rating?

This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; Safe was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 March 2021 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.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, October 2018

Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with some people reporting waits for help at busy times.

This was a comprehensive inspection on 20 and 24 September 2018. The first day was unannounced. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff, managers and health and social care professionals. They also reviewed care plans, staff records, medicines records, complaints and quality checks.

The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, safe medicines arrangements, trained staff and effective links with health professionals.

People were treated kindly and respectfully. Their care plans were personalised, and they were supported to make choices, stay in contact with family and friends, and take part in activities. The home had systems for complaints and for checking and improving quality.

The overall Good rating stayed the same as at the previous inspection. The report found no serious risks or concerns and did not identify any breaches of regulations.

What inspectors praised
  • Kind and respectful care

    People and relatives described staff as kind, caring and helpful. Inspectors saw staff explain care, offer reassurance and protect people's dignity.

    “The staff are very caring. It is a lovely place to be.” from the report
  • Personalised support

    Care plans described people's individual needs and were updated when those needs changed. People were supported to make choices and remain independent.

    “Care plans were personalised, reviewed and updated when people's needs changed.” from the report
  • Activities and community links

    People could choose from activities such as quizzes, games and outings. The home also supported links with local schools, nurseries and community events.

    “These included quizzes, games and outings to local areas of interest.” from the report
  • Safe medicines and risk management

    Inspectors found up-to-date risk assessments and safe arrangements for storing, recording and giving medicines.

    “Arrangements were in place for the safe management, storage, recording and administration of people's medicines.” from the report
  • Good oversight

    The manager and provider used audits, meetings and surveys to monitor the quality of care and respond to people's views.

    “A range of audits were completed by the registered manager and provider to monitor the quality of the service and the care provided.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Some waits for help

    minor

    People gave mixed feedback about staffing. Some said they sometimes waited for help, including up to 30 minutes after breakfast, although inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs during the inspection.

    “You see a lot of staff walking around, but after breakfast you can wait for 30 minutes to go to your room” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How quickly can staff usually respond when someone needs help, particularly after breakfast?
  2. 02What changes were made to staff deployment after the inspection?
  3. 03Was the additional staffing agreed by the provider put in place, and what difference has it made?
  4. 04How are care plans reviewed when a person's needs change?
  5. 05Which activities and community visits are currently available, and how are residents' choices used to plan them?

This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five quality areas, and all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 October 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of The Terrace

2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent rating
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read what inspectors found at The Terrace →

  2. October 2018Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at The Terrace →

  3. May 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. July 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. January 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. September 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. October 2011

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 October 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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

28 live-in carers within about an hour of North 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 £1,010 to £1,290 a week. 27 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.

“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
Claire A., about Carla M.
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
Beatrice N., about Rosemary H.
See live-in carers near North YorkshireProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.