CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Vicarage Court Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, protective equipment, testing, cleaning, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 vaccination requirements. The provider said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed as part of this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed as part of this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed as part of this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed as part of this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, January 2022
Vicarage Court Care Home: inspectors found good infection-control and visiting arrangements, but the service was not rated.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 January 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and the effect of COVID-19 staffing pressures.
Inspectors found screening for visitors, suitable use of protective equipment, regular COVID-19 testing, and up-to-date infection-control policies. They also found the home clean, well maintained and free from odours.
The home supported social contact through video calls and a visitors' pod. Some family visits had briefly stopped because some staff had tested positive for COVID-19, but visits were due to resume in line with guidance.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a standard rating for safe care.
Infection control
Visitors were screened before entry, and staff used protective equipment. Testing and procedures were in place to help prevent and manage outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was preventing visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean, well maintained and free from odours. Cleaning schedules were in place.
“The care home was clean, well maintained and odour-free.” from the report
Staff training and supplies
Staff had completed infection-control and protective-equipment training. Supplies of protective equipment were sufficient.
“All staff had undertaken training in infection prevention and control (IPC) and PPE.” from the report
Support for contact
The home used video calls and had created a visitors' pod to support contact while limiting infection risks.
“The home had made adaptations to create a visitors' 'pod' to allow partitioned visiting without having to enter the care home.” from the report
Temporary pause to some visits
minorSome family visits had briefly stopped because some staff had tested positive for COVID-19. The report said visits were due to resume in line with guidance.
“At the time of our inspection the home had briefly paused some family visits as a precautionary measure as some staff had tested Covid positive.” from the report
- 01How are family visits arranged now, and are any restrictions still in place?
- 02How do you manage staffing pressures when staff are absent because of COVID-19?
- 03What screening, testing and protective-equipment requirements apply to visitors today?
- 04How often are infection-control audits carried out, and how are any problems followed up?
- 05How will you support regular contact with my relative if an outbreak causes visits to pause?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care-quality questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 January 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, September 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, effective care, but staffing at busy times and some medicines records needed improvement.
This was an unannounced planned inspection. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They looked around the buildings and checked care records, staff files, medicines and management records.
The overall rating was Good. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were all rated Good. People were treated with dignity, supported to make choices, given suitable food and helped to access health professionals and activities.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors saw that some people had to wait for support at busy times, especially during lunch. Medicines were stored safely and given as prescribed, but some records and guidance needed improvement.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, dignity and respect.
“Every person we asked told us the staff were caring.” from the report
Safe recruitment
The home checked staff identity, references, criminal record information and professional registration where needed.
“Recruitment procedures were safe.” from the report
Health and nutrition
People received a balanced diet that took account of their needs and preferences. Staff supported people to see health and social care professionals.
“All the people we spoke with told us staff looked after them well and supported them to see a range of health and social care professionals when required.” from the report
Choice and independence
Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act and supported people to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“It was clear from our observations staff respected people's choices and promoted their independence, wherever possible.” from the report
Activities and relationships
The home offered activities and supported people to maintain relationships and take part in interests that mattered to them.
“There was a range of activities available to people living at Vicarage Court.” from the report
Waiting for staff at busy times
seriousInspectors saw that some people waited for help, especially during lunch and particularly in the dementia unit. The provider agreed to review staffing levels and how staff were deployed.
“For example, during the lunch time service we saw some people had to wait to get the support they needed from staff to eat their meal.” from the report
Medicines records and guidance
needs fixingFridge temperatures were not always recorded twice a day as required by the home's policy. Guidance for medicines given when needed did not clearly explain their purpose or when they should be used.
“We saw fridge temperatures were not always recorded twice every 24 hours as per the provider's own medicines policy.” from the report
Incomplete supervision records
minorNot all staff received supervision or appraisal in line with the home's policy. Some records were not detailed, complete or signed by both people involved.
“However, not everyone was receiving supervision or appraisal in line with the provider's own policy.” from the report
Care records not always personal enough
needs fixingSome records did not contain enough information about people's life history, culture, interests and dislikes. Work was continuing to transfer this information into electronic records.
“We found some people's care records could be more person centred.” from the report
- 01What staffing levels are now in place at mealtimes and other busy periods, especially in the dementia unit?
- 02How do you check that fridge temperatures are recorded twice every 24 hours?
- 03What written guidance do staff now have for medicines given when needed, including when each medicine should be used?
- 04How do you make sure every staff member receives the supervision and appraisal required by your policy?
- 05How will you ensure care records include each person's life history, interests, dislikes and cultural or spiritual needs?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, and the report records the findings from the visit on 05 August 2019. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 September 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 Vicarage Court Care Home
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 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
92 live-in carers within about an hour of Wakefield
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 £1,260 a week. 79 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.”
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.