CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Victoria Cottage
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about most infection control arrangements, including PPE, testing, visiting and outbreak management. They were only somewhat assured about the environment and the infection control policy because some areas were difficult to clean and audits did not cover every bathroom and toilet area.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; infection controls were mostly assured, but inspectors found environmental and audit gaps.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 28 February 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected the home.
Inspectors were assured about visitor checks, PPE, testing, safe admissions, social distancing and managing outbreaks. Staff had infection control training, and there was enough PPE. Visits were arranged in line with government guidance.
Inspectors were only somewhat assured about the building and the infection control policy. Some shower areas, equipment storage, damaged surfaces and waste bins made cleaning harder. The monthly infection control audits did not cover every bathroom and toilet area.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for the five areas of care.
Visitor safety
Visitors pre-booked visits and completed checks including a negative lateral flow test, a COVID-19 questionnaire and a temperature check.
“Visitors pre-booked their visits with the registered manager to keep track of how many people would be coming into the home.” from the report
PPE and staff training
Staff had infection control training and were seen wearing PPE. The manager had made sure there was enough PPE available.
“Staff were observed wearing PPE during our inspection, and people we spoke to said staff always have their masks on.” from the report
COVID-19 testing
The home had a testing programme for staff and people living there. People were also checked daily for COVID-19 symptoms.
“A programme of testing for COVID-19 was in place for all staff and people living at the service.” from the report
Some areas were harder to clean
needs fixingDust on disused shower rails, stored cleaning equipment, damaged paint, insecure waste bins and a damaged toilet roll holder created infection control risks. The report says some items had since been removed and improvements were planned.
“There were some infection prevention and control risks associated with the environment, specifically relating to several of the shower facilities.” from the report
Audits did not cover all facilities
needs fixingMonthly infection control audits did not include every en-suite, bathroom or individual toilet. This meant some hygiene problems might not be identified.
“IPC audits were taking place monthly, however we noted that the IPC audit tool did not include all areas of the home, for example, en-suites, bathroom or individual toilet facilities.” from the report
- 01Have the shower rails, damaged toilet roll holder, damaged paint and insecure waste bins all been repaired or removed?
- 02Do your current infection control audits cover every en-suite, bathroom and individual toilet?
- 03What cleaning schedules are now used for wet rooms and other areas identified in the report?
- 04What changes have been made to the bathroom facilities and home decoration since the inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; it was inspected but not rated and did not assess the other four key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 March 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, January 2020
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found exceptionally caring, responsive and well-led support, with safe and effective care rated Good.
This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 18 November and 5 December 2019. The inspector spoke with people, staff, relatives, an advocate and a health professional. They also observed care and checked care, medicines, staffing, recruitment and management records.
The home supported 10 people and was registered for up to 12. Inspectors found people were safe, had their health and nutritional needs met, and were supported by skilled staff. Medicines, infection control, risk management and staffing were all judged to be good.
Care was rated Outstanding because staff were exceptionally kind, respectful and supportive of people's independence. Responsive care and leadership were also rated Outstanding. The overall rating improved from Good at the previous inspection, published on 31 May 2017.
Kind and respectful care
Staff built warm relationships and supported people with dignity and respect, including people who could not communicate using speech.
“Staff had respectful, caring and friendly relationships with people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care was tailored to people's needs, preferences and goals. Staff supported independence and adapted support when people's needs changed.
“People received exceptionally personalised care and support which met their needs, reflected their preferences and promoted their wellbeing.” from the report
Active lives
People were supported to enjoy activities in and outside the home, keep in touch with family and friends, and develop skills.
“People were well supported to take part in a variety of activities they enjoyed.” from the report
Size of the home
minorThe home was larger than current best practice guidance, with places for up to 12 people. Inspectors said the building design and setting helped reduce any negative impact.
“This is larger than current best practice guidance.” from the report
- 01How would you support my relative's specific health risks, mobility needs and emergency arrangements?
- 02How do staff understand and respond to people who communicate without speech?
- 03How do you decide whether to reduce or stop medicines, and how is this reviewed with health professionals?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative, based on their interests?
- 05How does the size of the home affect day-to-day life, privacy and personal support?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises, care and management; the previous inspection was rated Good and was published on 31 May 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 January 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.
Every inspection of Victoria Cottage
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- May 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 November 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
88 live-in carers within about an hour of Bedford
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. 76 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
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.