CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Whitby Scheme
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Inspectors found suitable risk plans, safe recruitment, enough staff and medicines that were stored, given and recorded safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had induction, refresher and specialist training, with regular supervision and appraisals. People were supported with meals, healthcare and decisions about their care, although one person's weight checks had not been completed as often as required.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed to be kind and respectful. People were supported to build daily living skills, make choices and have privacy and dignity.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's histories, interests, communication needs and goals. People chose activities and were supported to access the community, and complaints information was available in easy-read form.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team used regular checks, meetings and feedback to monitor the service. People and staff said managers listened and responded to suggestions.
What inspectors found, February 2018
The Whitby Scheme: Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some premises and monitoring issues addressed or planned.
Inspectors visited without warning on 5 December 2017 and returned on 13 December 2017 with the visit announced. They visited all four homes, spoke with people and staff, and checked care, medicines, recruitment, training and other records.
The home was rated Good overall and remained Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable training and support, and care that respected people's choices and independence.
There were some issues. Hand-washing facilities at one house were corrected immediately. Some work surfaces and parts of one house were worn, and one person's weight had not been checked as often as required. Refurbishment and other action were planned.
Safe medicines
Inspectors found medicines were stored and given safely, and records confirmed people received them as prescribed. Staff had their medicines skills checked.
“We found medicines were stored and administered safely.” from the report
Respect and independence
Staff supported people to make choices and develop everyday skills such as cooking, shopping and managing money. Privacy and dignity were also respected.
“People were supported to remain as independent as possible and there was clear emphasis on helping people maintain daily living skills” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included personal histories, interests, communication needs and goals. People helped shape their plans and chose activities that mattered to them.
“Care plans had been developed and included background information centred on the individual.” from the report
Open management
People and staff could give feedback through meetings and questionnaires. Inspectors found that suggestions and concerns were acted on.
“This meant people who used the service were involved and their suggestions acted upon that promoted continuous improvements in the service.” from the report
Hand-washing facilities
needs fixingSuitable hand-washing facilities were not available at Endeavour House. The manager took immediate action after inspectors raised this.
“We identified that appropriate hand washing facilities were not available at Endeavour house.” from the report
Worn work surfaces
needs fixingSome work surfaces were worn and could not be cleaned effectively. Refurbishment plans were in place.
“We also found that some work surfaces were worn and it would not be possible to clean effectively.” from the report
Missed weight check
needs fixingOne person had not been weighed as often as the home's arrangements required. The manager said this would be addressed immediately.
“We did find that one person had not been weighed as frequently as they should have been.” from the report
Worn decoration
minorEndeavour House needed improvements to its decoration and personalisation. Refurbishment plans were in place to address this.
“We found that at Endeavour House, improvements to the décor were needed as in places it was very worn and lacked personalisation.” from the report
- 01Have the hand-washing facilities at Endeavour House been corrected, and how are they checked now?
- 02Have the worn work surfaces been replaced or refurbished so they can be cleaned effectively?
- 03What changes were made to ensure people's weights are checked at the required frequency?
- 04Has the planned refurbishment and personalisation of Endeavour House been completed?
- 05How will my relative be involved in their care plan, weekly meetings and choice of activities?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five questions and all four homes, including care records, medicines, staff files, facilities, and discussions with people and staff. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 February 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 Whitby Scheme
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 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
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.