CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Topaz House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks, medicines, recruitment and staffing were managed well, although environmental checks had not always identified maintenance hazards.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed and reviewed. Staff were trained, healthcare support was arranged when needed, and people were supported to make decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported people's independence, relationships, faith and involvement in decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and choices. People had access to activities, community links, healthcare support and ways to raise concerns.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People and staff spoke positively about the management. However, quality monitoring and governance systems needed to be strengthened so that shortfalls were identified and addressed.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but maintenance checks and management oversight needed strengthening.
This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 21 and 24 May 2019. One inspector spoke with one person using the home, two staff members, the registered manager and a health and social care professional. The inspector also reviewed care, medicine, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were treated with kindness, supported to make choices and encouraged to develop independence. Medicines, safeguarding, staffing, care planning and healthcare support were also found to be managed well.
There were some shortcomings. Daily environmental checks had not always identified issues such as an uncovered hot radiator, exposed hot water pipes and damage to a fire door. These were dealt with during the inspection, but the home was asked to improve its checks and strengthen its systems for finding and addressing problems.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw that people were treated with kindness and supported in a patient, individual way. People's privacy, dignity, equality and personal choices were respected.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Building independence
The home supported people to gain skills, take part in community activities and have as much choice and control as possible.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Safe medicines management
Medicines were received, stored, given and disposed of safely. Errors found through audits were investigated and acted on.
“Medicines were safely received, stored, administered and disposed of when no longer needed.” from the report
Skilled and supported staff
Staff had completed induction and training and were considered competent and knowledgeable. Staffing levels supported people's care, activities and medical appointments.
“Staff were competent, knowledgeable and skilled; and carried out their roles effectively.” from the report
Maintenance checks
needs fixingDaily environmental checks had not always been completed. Inspectors found an uncovered hot radiator, exposed hot water pipes and damage to a fire door, although the provider acted during the inspection.
“Environmental checks had not always been completed on a daily basis.” from the report
Management oversight
needs fixingThe home's quality monitoring systems were not robust enough to identify all the maintenance shortfalls. Inspectors recommended stronger regular checks and better oversight.
“Systems of governance and oversight were not sufficiently robust to have identified the issues we found in relation to maintenance.” from the report
- 01What new daily checks are now used to identify hazards such as hot radiators, exposed pipes and damaged fire doors?
- 02How are maintenance problems recorded, assigned and checked to make sure they are repaired promptly?
- 03How does the management team test that its quality monitoring systems are finding all shortfalls?
- 04How will my relative be supported to build skills, take part in activities and remain connected with the local community?
- 05How are people involved in reviewing their care plans, choices and future wishes?
This was an unannounced inspection of the care, support and premises, and it assessed all five CQC questions; all five ratings were Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 July 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.
What inspectors found, June 2017
Topaz House was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and person-centred care, with some minor issues to address.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 21 April 2017. One inspector spoke with one person, two staff and a deputy manager. They reviewed one care file, staff records, medicines, complaints, safety checks and quality monitoring. They also observed care and looked around the home with permission.
The home remained Good, as it was at the previous inspection. Inspectors found people were protected from harm, medicines were managed safely, staffing was sufficient and staff understood people's needs. Care plans were reviewed and people were supported with their health, meals, activities, independence and relationships.
Inspectors found a few matters for management to improve. These included completing some staff applications before the start date, keeping better records of interview decisions, ensuring all training was complete, cleaning the outside of the home more often and identifying an over-stocked medicine through audits.
Safe medicines
Inspectors found medicines were obtained in time, stored safely, given on time and recorded correctly. Controlled medicines were also safely held.
“Medicines were obtained in a timely way so that people did not run out of them.” from the report
Respect and choice
People were involved in planning their days and deciding what support, food and activities they wanted. Staff respected privacy, dignity and independence.
“People were consulted at all times about their planned day and contributed in having a say in how the support they required was to be provided.” from the report
Person-centred support
Care plans reflected people's needs and were reviewed regularly. People were supported to develop living skills, use community services and maintain relationships.
“Support plans reflected people's needs, were person-centred and contained information under ten areas of need.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors found staff were friendly and understood people's needs. People described a relaxed and supportive atmosphere.
“People received compassionate care from kind staff that knew about people's needs and preferences.” from the report
Recruitment records
needs fixingStaff application forms were completed on the start date rather than before staff began work. Management was asked to improve this and record why applicants were selected.
“While Disclosure and Barring Service and reference checks were made and received before staff started working, staff application forms were only completed on the start date, which was unconventional.” from the report
Incomplete training
needs fixingOne staff member had not completed safeguarding or fire safety training when inspectors visited. This was passed to management for action.
“one staff member said they had not yet completed safeguarding or fire safety training and this was passed to the director for action.” from the report
Outside cleanliness
minorInspectors asked for the outside of the home to be cleaned more regularly because of traffic pollution and litter.
“We asked that the exterior of the premises be cleaned more regularly, to reduce effects of traffic pollution from the main road and litter dropped by pedestrians.” from the report
Medicines audit
needs fixingThe quality checks had not identified that one person's medicines were over-stocked. Management said the monitoring systems would be used more carefully.
“We discussed the effectiveness of these with the deputy manager, as a minor shortfall with medicines (over-stocked for one person) had not been identified.” from the report
- 01Have all staff now completed safeguarding and fire safety training?
- 02Are staff application forms completed before people start work, and are interview decisions recorded?
- 03How do you check that medicines are not over-stocked and that audits identify problems?
- 04How often is the exterior of the home cleaned?
- 05How would you support my relative's particular health, mental health, activity and relationship needs?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, but inspectors reviewed one person's care file and spoke with one person. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 June 2017 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 Topaz House
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2015
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 May 2012.
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
12 live-in carers within about an hour of North East Lincolnshire
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 £1,350 a week. 10 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
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.