CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Thorpe House Specialist Adult Mental Health Unit Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, medicines were stored and handled safely, staffing was appropriate during the visit, and infection control arrangements were effective. Personal emergency evacuation plans lacked detail, but these were updated during the inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before moving in, care plans were reviewed, and staff had training, supervision and induction. The home supported nutrition, worked with other health professionals and had systems for consent and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives said staff were caring and respectful. Inspectors observed friendly interactions, and people were supported to make choices, maintain privacy and develop independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were person-centred and reflected people's choices, communication needs and preferences. The home offered activities, support to maintain relationships and a garden, and people and relatives could raise concerns.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager used audits, daily walkarounds and spot checks to oversee the service. People, relatives and staff gave positive feedback, and the home used meetings and surveys to gather views and make improvements.
What inspectors found, June 2023
Thorpe House Specialist Adult Mental Health Unit Limited is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with minor issues corrected during the visit.
The inspection was unannounced. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience visited the home, spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives said they felt safe, staff were caring, medicines were managed safely, and people's needs and preferences were recorded and supported.
Inspectors found two minor problems during the visit. Personal emergency evacuation plans did not contain enough detail, and there was not enough signage to help people find their way around. The manager acted promptly and updated the plans and put up signs on the day.
The previous rating was Good in June 2019 at the former premises. Safe had previously been rated Requires Improvement, but this inspection found it had improved to Good.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe. Inspectors also found that risks, medicines, staffing and infection control were managed appropriately.
“People and relatives told us they felt safe. Medicines were managed safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives said staff were caring and respectful. Inspectors saw staff speaking with people in a caring and friendly way.
“We observed staff engaging with people during the inspection, in a caring and friendly manner.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans reflected people's preferences, communication needs and choices. People and relatives were involved in reviewing care.
“People's care plans were person-centred. Plans included how people liked to receive their care and support.” from the report
Management oversight
The home used audits, daily checks and spot checks to monitor care and take action when needed. Relatives and staff spoke positively about the management.
“A variety of audits, daily walk rounds and spot checks were in place to provide the registered manager with oversight of the service” from the report
Activities and shared spaces
The home had communal areas, a safe garden, an occupational therapy assistant and a range of activities. Relatives spoke positively about opportunities to go out and take part in activities.
“There was an occupational therapy assistant employed by the home and there were a range of activities available to people.” from the report
Limited navigation signs
minorInspectors found there was not enough signage around the building to help people navigate. Signs were put up during the inspection.
“There was a lack of signage around the building to help navigate people. The registered manager took prompt action on the day on the inspection and put signs up.” from the report
- 01Can you show us the updated personal emergency evacuation plan for the person who may use the home, and explain how it is reviewed?
- 02What signs are now in place to help people navigate the building, including the new purpose-built areas?
- 03What activities are currently available, and how do you match them to each person's interests and mental health needs?
- 04What additional end-of-life care training have staff completed since the inspection?
- 05How are relatives involved when a person's care plan or needs change?
This was an unannounced inspection of the care home covering all five CQC questions, including both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 June 2023 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 Thorpe House Specialist Adult Mental Health Unit Limited
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Thorpe House Specialist Adult Mental Health Unit Limited →
- June 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 April 2021.
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 Kirklees
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 £1,260 a week. 86 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.”
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
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.