CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Upton Grey Close Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable infection prevention and control arrangements, including screening, testing, protective equipment, cleaning and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not covered by the targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not covered by the targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not covered by the targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not covered by the targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured infection control arrangements were in place, although social distancing remained an ongoing challenge.
Inspectors visited the home on 3 November 2020. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. They looked at infection prevention and control measures rather than the full range of care.
Inspectors found that visitors were screened, staff and residents had temperature checks, and staff had training in infection control and using protective equipment. Testing, cleaning schedules, isolation arrangements and outbreak plans were also in place.
The home supported people to keep in touch with family and friends in different ways, including video calls and socially distanced visits. Inspectors said they were assured that infection control arrangements were keeping people safe.
The home was inspected but not rated overall. The Safe question was also inspected but not rated, so this report does not provide a full quality rating for the home.
Keeping in touch with family
The home used video calls, socially distanced visits and other creative ways to help people stay in contact with relatives and friends.
“People were supported to keep in touch with their family and friends and alternative forms of maintaining social contact were being used.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visits were planned to reduce infection risk. Visitors received information on arrival and were screened for signs of infection.
“Socially distanced visits by family and friends, to the home, were well organised and planned to reduce risk and avoid the spread of infection.” from the report
Staff training and testing
Staff had infection control and protective equipment training. Staff were tested weekly and residents monthly.
“Staff had received training in infection control and COVID 19.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The home had arrangements for isolating people with symptoms and plans for managing current or future outbreaks.
“Contingency plans were in place to manage ongoing or future outbreaks effectively.” from the report
Social distancing was difficult
minorStaff supported people with social distancing, but inspectors noted that this remained an ongoing challenge.
“Staff supported people to understand and follow social distancing guidance through regular redirection and advice although this was an ongoing challenge.” from the report
- 01How do you currently support residents who find social distancing difficult?
- 02Are weekly staff testing and monthly resident testing still being carried out?
- 03How are visits from family and friends currently organised and screened?
- 04What arrangements are used if a resident or staff member develops symptoms?
- 05How often are high-touch areas such as door handles, remote controls and light switches cleaned?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question only; the home was not given an overall rating and the other four questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 November 2020 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 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements since the last inspection.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 5 and 6 December 2017. Inspectors observed care, spoke with people, staff and relatives, and checked care records, medicines records, staff files, training records and quality checks.
The home supported five adults with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. Inspectors rated all five areas Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. They found enough trained staff, safe medicines management, personalised care, support with health needs and activities, and a positive approach to choice and independence.
The previous inspection in January 2016 rated the home Requires Improvement and found three regulatory breaches. This inspection found the provider had completed the required actions, including improving care plans, mental capacity practice, risk records and quality monitoring.
Personalised care
Care plans included people's needs, preferences, relationships, activities and communication styles. People were involved in planning their care.
“We could see this lead to detailed care and support plans which reflected people wishes, needs and preferences.” from the report
Choice and independence
Staff supported people to make choices and live their daily lives in ways that suited them, including choosing when to get up, where to eat and when to go out.
“People were able to express their preferences and have them respected and supported by staff.” from the report
Skilled and knowledgeable staff
Staff had training relevant to the people they supported, including epilepsy awareness, safeguarding, medicines and support for distress. Recruitment checks were also in place.
“People are supported by staff who are skilled and knowledgeable.” from the report
Good healthcare support
People received regular health checks and timely support with appointments and advice from healthcare professionals.
“People had health action plans and their hospital passport contained detailed information on their health and the support they would require.” from the report
Improved management
Quality monitoring, care records and other management records had improved since the previous inspection. Staff described the leadership as supportive and approachable.
“Regular audits of the quality and safety of the service had continued to take place and were recorded.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people's care plans checked and updated when their needs, wishes or communication styles change?
- 02How are medicines, including medicines given in a person's preferred way, checked for safety and effectiveness?
- 03What activities and community opportunities are currently available, and how do people choose when to take part?
- 04How are mental capacity decisions and any restrictions on people's liberty recorded and reviewed?
- 05How are complaints and suggestions from people and relatives recorded, answered and used to make improvements?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection of the home, including its premises and care, and it reviewed all five CQC question areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 June 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 Upton Grey Close Care Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 January 2011.
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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.