CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 4 Highgate Park
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe and staff understood safeguarding and risk management. Medicines were administered safely, but inspectors identified minor recording issues and incomplete annual competency checks were still being completed.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff received training, supervision and appraisals. They supported people's health, independence, diet and decision-making, and worked with healthcare professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were described as warm, friendly, attentive and respectful. They supported privacy, dignity, choice and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, likes and abilities and were regularly reviewed. People were supported with activities, relationships, meals and communication.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Staff, carers and people living there gave very positive feedback about management. Quality checks and team meetings were in place, although records about one-to-one hours and how audit issues would be resolved were being developed.
What inspectors found, March 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support, with minor medicines recording issues and a staffing gap affecting one activity.
Inspectors visited on 14 December 2017 and 3 January 2018. They spoke with people living there, carers and staff. They observed care and activities, looked around the home, and checked care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files and quality checks.
The home supported up to four adults, mainly people with learning or physical disabilities. Inspectors found people felt safe, staff were kind and respectful, and support was tailored to each person's needs. Care plans were detailed and kept up to date.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. It was also Good at the previous inspection in October 2015, so the overall rating remained Good.
Inspectors found two minor medicines recording issues and noted that there had not been enough staff on some recent Sunday mornings to support people to attend church. Managers agreed to address these points.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff understood how to protect people from abuse and manage identified risks.
“People who used the service were asked whether they felt safe living there.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people well and built caring relationships. Inspectors saw support that protected privacy, dignity and personal space.
“Staff knew people very well and had developed extremely positive and genuinely caring relationships with them.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, abilities and support needs. People were involved in choosing activities, meals and how they spent their time.
“These records evidenced people who used the service and health and social care professionals were actively involved in shaping the care and support provided.” from the report
Supportive management
Staff, carers and people living there spoke very positively about the management team. Staff said they felt supported in their roles.
“All the staff we spoke with described feeling supported within their roles.” from the report
Sunday staffing
needs fixingIn recent weeks, there had not been enough staff on Sunday mornings to support some people who wanted to attend church. The area manager agreed to address this.
“in recent weeks there had not been enough staff on a Sunday morning to provide this support.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingInspectors asked managers to make sure handwritten prescribing instructions were checked and countersigned, and that guidance for medicines given when needed was reviewed.
“The area manager agreed to address these minor recording issues.” from the report
One-to-one hours records
minorInspectors asked for clearer records showing how people's one-to-one hours were used. The auditing system was being developed to record issues and expected timescales for resolving them.
“We spoke with the area manager about maintaining clear records to evidence how people's one to one hours were used” from the report
- 01What action was taken after inspectors found there were not enough Sunday morning staff to support church attendance?
- 02How are handwritten prescribing instructions now checked and countersigned?
- 03How is guidance for medicines given when needed kept accurate and up to date?
- 04How are one-to-one hours recorded, and how do you check they are used in line with each person's choices?
- 05How will you make sure staffing is sufficient for my relative's preferred activities?
This was an announced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the ratings remained Good from the previous inspection in October 2015. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 March 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 4 Highgate Park
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
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 6 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.