CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Well Royd House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines were managed safely, although PRN protocols needed improvement and were completed after the inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had good outcomes and staff had suitable training and experience. The home supported people's health, nutrition, choices and independence.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and caring and treated people with dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions about their care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People had access to activities, social opportunities and community links that reflected their choices.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had clear management arrangements, regular audits and a focus on improving care. Staff said they felt supported and morale was good.
What inspectors found, May 2019
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with some PRN medicines records improved after the visit.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 30 April 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, staff and a relative, observed care, reviewed three care records and checked management records and audits.
The home supported 10 people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and supported to make choices, build skills and become more independent. Staff understood people's needs and there were enough staff on duty.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found one area where PRN medicines instructions could be clearer. The records were completed after the inspection.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, take positive risks and develop everyday skills. This included cooking, cleaning, personal care and activities in the community.
“There was a strong focus on promoting choice, control and independence.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed kind care, and people and relatives gave positive feedback. Staff respected privacy and involved people in decisions.
“We observed staff being kind and caring.” from the report
Safe staffing and risk support
The home had enough staff and safe recruitment procedures. Staff knew the risks affecting each person and supported people to stay safe while having freedom.
“There were enough staff deployed to ensure people received appropriate care and support.” from the report
Personalised activities and care
Care plans gave staff detailed information about people's needs and were regularly reviewed. People could choose from activities such as walks, shopping, holidays and arts and crafts.
“People had access to a good range of activities and social opportunities.” from the report
Management and improvement
The home used audits, feedback and incident reviews to monitor quality and make improvements. Staff described the management team as supportive.
“There were effective systems and processes in place to monitor and improve the service.” from the report
PRN medicines instructions
needs fixingSome PRN medicines protocols did not give staff enough help to recognise when a person needed the medicine. The records were completed after the inspection.
“We identified (PRN) protocols could be improved to support staff recognise when people needed these.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to the PRN medicines protocols after the inspection?
- 02How do staff recognise when each person may need PRN medicine, and how is this recorded?
- 03How will you support my relative to build independence and take positive risks safely?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative?
- 05How are people and relatives involved in reviewing care plans and giving feedback?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions; the previous overall rating was Good in August 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 May 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, November 2016
Well Royd House was rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some improvements needed to training and the building.
This was an unannounced inspection on 10 August 2016. One inspector spoke with six people living in the home and four support workers. They observed care in shared areas and at a mealtime, and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files, staffing, maintenance and quality checks.
The home supported 12 people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found people were safe, treated kindly and supported to make choices. Staff helped people stay in contact with family, use local services, follow hobbies and try new activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection in August 2014 found that the legal requirements were being met. The report made recommendations about specialist staff training and worn flooring, but recorded no breaches.
Safe medicines
Inspectors found medicines were stored securely and given safely and on time. Records were complete and up to date.
“All records seen were complete and up to date, with no recording omissions.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff took time to listen, explain what they were doing and support people at their own pace. People's privacy and dignity were respected.
“Staff were observed to be warm, kind, caring and respectful.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's likes, dislikes, communication needs and preferred routines. Staff knew the people they supported well.
“People's care records were up to date and personal to the individual.” from the report
Community and activities
People were supported to take part in activities, keep in touch with family and friends, go on trips and try new experiences.
“People were supported to access the community and try out new activities as well as continue with previous interests.” from the report
Management checks
The manager and provider used regular audits, meetings and reviews to monitor safety and quality.
“Regular audits were completed internally to monitor service provision and to ensure the safety of people who used the service.” from the report
Specialist staff training
needs fixingInspectors recommended that staff receive further training to meet people's specialist needs. This was a recommendation rather than a breach.
“We have made a recommendation for staff to receive other training to meet any specialist needs of people.” from the report
Worn flooring
minorSome flooring in communal areas and toilets showed wear and tear. Inspectors recommended better maintenance for people's comfort.
“However, the flooring in some communal areas and lavatories was showing signs of wear and tear.” from the report
One missing support assessment
needs fixingFor one person receiving one-to-one support to stay safe, a mental capacity assessment and support plan were not yet in place. The person in charge said this would be addressed immediately.
“However, for one person who received one to one staff support to keep them safe, a mental capacity assessment and support plan were not yet in place to show why this level of support was required.” from the report
- 01What specialist training have staff completed for the individual needs of people living here?
- 02Has the worn flooring in communal areas and lavatories now been replaced?
- 03Was the missing mental capacity assessment and support plan completed, and how is it kept under review?
- 04How are staffing levels changed when people go out in the evening or need extra support?
- 05How are people and their relatives involved in reviewing care plans, activities and menus?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the overall service and all five CQC areas, including observations, discussions and checks of care, staff, medicines, maintenance and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 November 2016 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 Well Royd House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 November 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Calderdale
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. 87 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“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.