CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Valley Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised respite care, with some minor communication and monitoring issues.
The inspection took place on 25 February 2019. One inspector visited the home, spoke with staff and a relative, contacted six more relatives after the visit, and reviewed care, medicine and management records.
The home provides short respite stays for up to three people while maintenance work continues. Two people were staying during the visit. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with dignity, and supported by trained staff who understood their complex health needs.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection. The earlier breaches relating to consent and quality monitoring were no longer breaches.
Safer medicines
Medicine procedures and checks had improved. Only staff assessed as competent supported people with medicines.
“The provider had improved medicine management procedures and introduced new checks which staff confirmed had helped reduce errors to zero in the previous 12 months.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff received induction, specialist training and supervision. Training was monitored so staff skills stayed up to date.
“Staff were skilled, competent and suitably trained to meet people's needs effectively.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff understood people's communication, reassured people when anxious, and promoted dignity and independence.
“There were caring interactions between staff and people who used the service.” from the report
Personalised respite care
Care plans included people's preferences and communication needs. Staff contacted relatives before stays and used information from home to provide continuity.
“Care plans were personalised and included details about people's preferences to enable staff support people in ways they preferred.” from the report
Improvements since the last inspection
The home had improved its approach to risk, medicines, consent, complaints and quality monitoring. The previous breaches were no longer present.
“At this inspection, we found improvements had been made and there was no longer a breach of the Regulations.” from the report
Some concerns were not followed up clearly
needs fixingOne relative said they were not told the outcome of an issue raised informally. The manager said outcomes would be communicated in future where appropriate.
“However, one relative told us they were not advised of the outcome of an issue they had raised informally.” from the report
Action plans were not always kept current
needs fixingQuality checks were taking place, but records did not always show that action plans had been updated after work was completed.
“However, action plans were not always updated to reflect actions taken.” from the report
Limited activity equipment
minorStaff said activities were limited by the equipment available. The manager was encouraging staff to find new opportunities.
“Staff told us activities were limited due to the equipment they had available.” from the report
- 01How many people can currently stay at the home while the maintenance work continues?
- 02What activities and equipment are available for someone with my relative's needs and interests?
- 03How will you tell us the outcome of any concern or complaint we raise?
- 04How do you check that action plans have been completed and updated?
- 05What is the current position on the new manager's application to register with CQC?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC areas and checking improvements promised after the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 March 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, March 2018
Valley Road rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found caring staff but weaknesses in medicines, risk management, consent and quality checks.
This was an announced comprehensive inspection on 24 and 29 January 2018. Inspectors reviewed care plans, daily records, medicines, staff recruitment and training, quality checks and the building. They spoke with staff, one person and four relatives.
The home provides short respite stays for up to four people with learning disabilities and complex health needs. Inspectors found kind and personalised care, enough staff, suitable training and support for people's health, food and communication needs.
However, medicines and some safety risks were not managed consistently. Records did not always explain risks or best-interest decisions. The home also needed to improve its complaints process, accessible information and quality monitoring.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. This was a fall from Good at the November 2015 inspection and was the first time the home received this rating.
Kind, personalised care
Staff knew people well and understood their likes, dislikes and preferred ways of receiving support. Inspectors observed caring interactions and respect for privacy.
“Staff knew people well and understood their likes, dislikes and preferences for how they wanted to be cared for and supported.” from the report
Staffing and safeguarding
There were enough staff, and recruitment checks were completed. Staff understood how to recognise and report possible abuse or poor practice.
“There were enough staff to provide support to people when they needed it.” from the report
Training and health support
Staff received induction, training and support relevant to people's needs. People were supported with their health, nutrition and swallowing needs.
“All staff received an induction, training and support that gave the skills and confidence to meet people's needs and promote their welfare.” from the report
Individual food support
Meals reflected people's preferences and dietary needs. Staff supported people to eat and drink safely and to use adapted equipment more independently.
“We saw staff prepared meals and supported people to eat and drink in a way that met their individual needs and was safe.” from the report
Medicines and safety risks
seriousAs-needed medicine instructions did not give enough guidance, and topical cream instructions lacked body maps. Some mobility and equipment risks were not fully assessed or explained to staff.
“Medicines were not always managed safely and checks had not identified where improvements were required.” from the report
Consent and legal decision-making
seriousNot everyone had a recorded capacity assessment. Best-interest decisions and the authority of relatives to give consent were not consistently recorded.
“We found this was a breach of Regulation 11 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.” from the report
Quality monitoring
seriousChecks were irregular or only covered people staying at the time. They failed to identify problems with medicines, risk assessments and care records.
“We found this was a breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.” from the report
Complaints and accessible information
needs fixingThe complaints policy did not clearly explain written responses or appeal rights. Complaint records were inconsistent, and surveys were not adapted to each person's communication needs.
“The policy was not clear if complainants would receive a written response to their complaint and what their rights were to appeal following receipt of that response.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the as-needed medicine protocols, including how staff recognise pain when someone cannot communicate verbally?
- 02Have individual risk assessments for falls, pressure areas and moving with specialist equipment now been completed and shared with all staff?
- 03How are Mental Capacity Act assessments, best-interest decisions and consent from legally authorised representatives now recorded?
- 04How are medicines, care plans and daily records audited across all people using the respite service, rather than only those staying during a check?
- 05How can my relative give feedback or make a complaint in a format suited to their communication needs, and how will I receive the outcome?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall rating, including the care provided and the premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 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 Valley Road
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2019Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 October 2014.
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 Warwickshire
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 £950 to £1,260 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.