CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Vicarage
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, testing, protective equipment, cleaning, visiting and outbreak planning. The provider also said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control and visiting arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 18 February 2022. Inspectors gave the home 24 hours’ notice. They looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
The home had regular COVID-19 testing, suitable protective equipment, hand-washing facilities and screening for visitors. Inspectors found the home clean and well ventilated. Staff followed a daily recorded cleaning routine and had training in infection control and using protective equipment.
The home had plans for managing an outbreak, including supporting people to isolate in their rooms. Visiting was allowed in line with government guidance, with protective equipment encouraged and alternative contact available if there was an outbreak.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or a full rating for all five areas of care.
Infection control
Inspectors found the home clean, well ventilated and using social distancing. Cleaning was enhanced and recorded each day.
“The service was clean and well ventilated with social distancing being promoted across the service.” from the report
Protective equipment and testing
Staff and residents received regular COVID-19 testing. Staff were trained to use protective equipment safely.
“Staff wore PPE to minimise the risk of COVID-19 infection transmission.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The home had plans to reduce the risk to other people if an outbreak happened, including isolation in bedrooms and seeking further guidance.
“In the event of an outbreak the service had plans in place to reduce the risk to others.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
Visits were facilitated in line with government guidance. The home also had alternative ways to maintain social contact during an outbreak.
“Visitors were encouraged to wear appropriate PPE while on site and alternative arranges could be put in place to maintain social contact if the service had a COVID-19 outbreak.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you manage staffing if COVID-19 caused staff shortages, and how would this affect the person’s usual support?
- 02How would visits work if there was a COVID-19 outbreak, and what alternative contact would be offered?
- 03How would you support a resident to isolate in their room if this was needed?
- 04How often are cleaning records, infection control training and the infection prevention and control policy reviewed?
- 05What are the home’s current arrangements for testing, protective equipment and COVID-19 vaccinations for staff and visiting professionals?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not assess the other four key questions or provide a full service rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 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, September 2018
The Vicarage was rated Good overall, but inspectors found recruitment and building safety checks that needed improvement.
This was the first inspection of the home. It was announced 48 hours in advance and took place on 7 August 2018. One inspector spoke with staff, the person living there, a relative and two professionals. They also looked around the building and checked care records, staff files and service documents.
The home was rated Good for effective, caring, responsive and well-led care. Inspectors found kind staff, person-centred care plans, support for independence and good links with health and social care professionals.
Safe care was rated Requires Improvement. Recruitment checks did not always follow the home's policy, and inspectors asked for action on window safety. The medicines policy also needed updating, although the home was not supporting anyone with medicines at the time.
The provider responded to the issues raised during the inspection and took immediate action on some of them. This was the home's first inspection, so there was no previous rating to compare.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors received positive feedback about staff's kindness and support. They also observed relaxed, respectful interactions.
“The staff appear to show genuine concern and are very supportive, they appear to want people to progress and achieve.” from the report
Support for independence
Staff encouraged people to make their own decisions and build on their existing skills. Activities were based on people's interests.
“The staff are very positive and keen to try and do new things to increase independence.” from the report
Responsive provider
The provider listened to the issues inspectors raised and took action on recruitment and environmental checks.
“They were responsive to the points we raised with them, in relation to checks of the environment and the recruitment process, and took action.” from the report
Recruitment records
needs fixingStaff files did not always contain a full work history or references from the most recent or current employer. This meant possible gaps in employment were not fully checked.
“Although staff had provided information about their recent employment, a comprehensive work history was not in place.” from the report
Window safety
seriousInspectors found that window restrictors had not been checked and were not tamper-proof. Single-glazed windows had not been reinforced or risk assessed at the time of inspection.
“We were concerned about the risk of people hurting themselves or falling.” from the report
- 01Have all staff files now been checked for full employment histories and references from the most recent or current employer?
- 02What changes were made to the window restrictors, and how are they checked to make sure they remain safe and tamper-proof?
- 03Has the risk assessment and protective film for the single-paned windows been completed?
- 04Has the medicines policy been updated to cover storage temperatures, ordering, disposal and covert medicines?
- 05If my relative needs medicines support, what training will the staff have before providing it?
This was the home's first comprehensive inspection and covered all five CQC questions; one person was living there at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 September 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.
Every inspection of The Vicarage
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2018GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 September 2017.
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
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.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.