CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Valley Way Respite Service
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found safeguarding systems, suitable risk assessments, enough staff and safe recruitment. Medicines, infection control, accidents and emergency arrangements were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before stays began and staff received induction, training, supervision and appraisals. People were supported with food, healthcare, consent and best-interest decisions.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed to be kind, attentive and respectful. People and relatives were involved in care decisions, and staff promoted privacy, dignity, choice and independence.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- The home provided highly personalised support and used creative communication methods, activities and transition support. Inspectors found examples of people becoming more independent and settling successfully into new arrangements.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had quality checks, open communication and systems for acting on feedback and complaints. Staff, relatives and healthcare professionals spoke positively about the leadership and partnership working.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Valley Way Respite Service was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care and Outstanding support tailored to people's individual needs.
This was an unannounced inspection on 19 December 2019. One inspector observed care, spoke with relatives, staff and healthcare professionals, and checked care plans, risk assessments, medicine records, staff files and quality records.
The home was rated Good overall. It was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. It was rated Outstanding for Responsive, which means inspectors found especially strong personalised support, choice, communication and activities.
Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines management, suitable risk assessments and good infection control. They also found kind staff who respected privacy, dignity and independence, and managers who listened to feedback and acted on it.
The previous overall rating was Good, published on 5 June 2017. The Responsive rating improved from Good to Outstanding. The other four question ratings remained Good.
Highly personalised support
Staff adapted support to individual needs and helped people make major changes, including moving towards independent living.
“Staff had outstanding skills and an excellent understanding of people's needs which helped people to enhance their lives.” from the report
Choice and communication
People were supported to make choices in ways that suited them, including through technology and non-verbal communication.
“The service had an innovative approach to using technology and had taken innovative steps to meet people's information and communication needs” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people gently and respectfully, while supporting their dignity and independence.
“Staff were kind, attentive and spoke in a gentle and pleasant manner and interacted well in a way that people understood.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
There were enough staff on the inspection day, recruitment checks were completed, and medicines records showed people received medicines as prescribed.
“There were adequate numbers of staff on the day of the inspection.” from the report
Clean environment
The home had infection control procedures and was observed to be very clean and tidy.
“On the day of the inspection, we noted the service was exceptionally clean and tidy.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What is the current status of the new manager's CQC registration, and how was the management handover completed?
- 02How will you assess staffing levels for my relative's individual needs and for changes in occupancy?
- 03How will you support my relative to communicate choices if they cannot communicate verbally?
- 04What personalised activities and technology are available for my relative during a respite stay?
- 05How will you share information with our family and other professionals if medicines or health needs change?
This was an unannounced inspection of all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; inspectors reviewed three people's records and four staff files. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 February 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 2017
Valley Way Respite Service was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support, with some follow-up needed on injury records and liberty safeguards.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 13 April 2017. Inspectors spoke with relatives, people using the home and staff. They observed care and checked care files, staff records, medicines records, menus, daily records and policies.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. It had also been rated Good at the previous inspection, so the overall rating remained Good.
Inspectors found robust safeguarding arrangements, enough staff, safe medicines management and clean surroundings. Staff were kind, respected privacy and dignity, and knew people's communication needs and preferences. Care plans were person-centred and families knew how to complain.
There were two areas needing follow-up. The home was going to improve its body-map records so that actions after unexplained bruises or injuries were clear. It was also seeking advice about whether more Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications were needed.
Safeguarding and staffing
Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse. Staffing levels changed according to how many people stayed and the level of support they needed.
“There were robust safeguarding processes in place and the service had demonstrated where it had learned from incidents and improved practise to keep people safe.” from the report
Safe medicines and environment
Medicines were securely stored and administration records had no gaps. The home was clean, odour free and equipped for people with complex physical needs.
“Medicine administration records had no gaps and the service had clear records of what allergies people had, and what medicines they took” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm interactions and found that staff understood people's individual ways of communicating. Families said the home felt friendly and homely.
“We observed kind and caring interactions throughout the day from staff towards people” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's preferences, background and communication needs. The home introduced new people gradually when change was difficult for them.
“Support plans were person centred, with detail on the likes and dislikes of each person” from the report
Quality monitoring
Managers carried out regular checks on key records and followed up gaps. Staff received supervision and training for people's specialist needs.
“Quality monitoring systems were robust and regular audits on medicines, care plans, risk assessments and daily records were completed” from the report
Injury records needed clearer follow-up
needs fixingInspectors found it was not clear what action had been taken after an unexplained bruise or injury was recorded. The home said it would change the form to record the outcome.
“We discussed with the co-ordinator that it was not clear what action was taken after the body maps were completed” from the report
Liberty safeguards needed review
needs fixingThe home was seeking advice about whether every person whose liberty was restricted during a respite stay needed a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards application. Inspectors asked the home to report on its planned action.
“we asked the service to update us on the action they were going to take regarding making more applications.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to body-map forms, and how do you now record and follow up unexplained bruises or injuries?
- 02What advice did you receive about Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications, and are the required applications now in place?
- 03What staffing levels would be provided if all six places were occupied and several people needed one-to-one support?
- 04Which staff are trained to give emergency epilepsy medicine, and how do you make sure new staff are supported before working alone?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, with inspectors observing care and reviewing records, medicines, staffing and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 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 Valley Way Respite Service
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 February 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Barnet
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 £1,300 a week. 83 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“The quality of life that she's given my parents has been priceless. The peace of mind she's given my sisters and I, through a very difficult time, has been invaluable.”
“Folasade is really kind, patient and respectful, has a fantastic sense of humour and such a positive outlook on life.”
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.