CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Venn House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, PPE, testing, cleaning, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 vaccination requirements. The provider also said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong COVID-19 infection controls and visiting arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 1 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
Inspectors were assured that visitors, people using the service and staff were protected from infection. They found appropriate testing, temperature checks, PPE, cleaning, social distancing and up-to-date COVID-19 policies.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide an overall quality rating or a full rating of all five areas of care.
Visitor infection checks
Visitors had to book visits, take a lateral flow test and have their temperature recorded on arrival.
“On arrival visitors were asked to consent to a lateral flow test (LFT) and their temperatures recorded.” from the report
PPE and hygiene
Inspectors found suitable PPE available near bedrooms, reminders about its correct use and extra cleaning of frequently touched areas.
“There was a plentiful supply of PPE close to people's bedrooms.” from the report
Up-to-date procedures
The home had current COVID-19 policies, procedures and risk assessments to guide staff in keeping people safe.
“Policies, procedures and risk assessments relating to COVID-19 were up to date which enabled staff to keep people safe.” from the report
Healthcare support
Staff continued to help people access healthcare, including arrangements for hospital visits and safe returns to the home.
“Staff continued to support people to access healthcare and arrangements were in place should people need to attend hospital and return to the home safely.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you managing staffing pressures now, and have they affected people's care?
- 02Do visitors still have to book visits, take a lateral flow test and have their temperature recorded?
- 03How do you make sure PPE supplies and infection control procedures remain adequate?
- 04What arrangements are in place if someone needs hospital treatment and then returns to the home?
- 05How do you check that staff and visiting professionals meet the COVID-19 vaccination requirements or have an exemption?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not provide ratings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 February 2022 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, August 2019
Rated Good across all five areas; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with improvements since the previous Requires Improvement rating.
This was a planned inspection on 18 and 22 July 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and a visiting district nurse. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicine records, staff files, training records, audits and surveys.
At the time, 16 people were living in the Coach House, which could accommodate 18 people. The home was only using this building. Inspectors found people were safe, treated kindly and supported by staff who knew their needs. Care plans were personalised and activities, food and healthcare were adapted to people's choices and needs.
The home received a Good rating for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was an improvement in Safe and Well-led from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection in May 2018. The previous inspection had no breaches of regulation.
Personalised care
Care plans were up to date and tailored to each person's needs, routines and preferences. Staff knew people well and responded to changes.
“People received person-centred care which was responsive to their specific needs and wishes.” from the report
Safety and staffing
Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment and clear risk management. Medicines, accidents, safeguarding and infection control were handled safely.
“There were enough staff available to support people according to their needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff positively. Inspectors saw patient, kind interactions and respect for privacy, dignity and independence.
“During our observations of care, interactions between people and staff were patient and kind.” from the report
Activities and choice
People could choose from group and individual activities suited to their interests. Staff also supported communication and involvement in decisions.
“People enjoyed activities to their personal taste and individual needs.” from the report
Improving leadership
The home had acted on the previous inspection and had embedded quality checks and improvement work. People, relatives and staff were asked for their views.
“At this inspection we found improvements had continued to be made across the service and quality assurance systems embedded.” from the report
As-needed medicine instructions
minorInstructions for medicines taken only when needed were still being developed during the inspection. Families should ask how these instructions are now recorded and reviewed.
“PRN protocols (as required medicine sheets) were being developed at the time of the inspection.” from the report
New electronic records
minorThe electronic care planning system was a recent change and staff were still learning to use it fully. Ask how the system is now working in practice.
“The provider was now using an electronic care planning tool and staff were still learning how to use the system to its full potential.” from the report
- 01How are medicines taken only when needed recorded, with clear instructions about when each medicine should be given?
- 02How is the electronic care planning system working now, and how do staff make sure they see changes in people's needs?
- 03How would you coordinate care with the local community nursing teams if my relative needed nursing support?
- 04What activities would be suitable for my relative's interests, communication needs and level of independence?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in end-of-life care planning if this became necessary?
This was a planned inspection that considered all five CQC questions and included the care and premises being used in the Coach House; at the time, the main house was not in use. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 August 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.
Every inspection of Venn House
5 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2018Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- October 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.