CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Yarborough House RCH
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care but serious fire safety, staffing, medicines and management problems.
This was the home’s first inspection since it registered with this provider. One inspector visited and an Expert by Experience spoke by telephone with five relatives. Inspectors also spoke with staff and managers and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
Inspectors found people were treated kindly and supported with dignity. Staff understood safeguarding procedures, people had choices about their care, and end of life wishes were discussed. However, fire risks had not been dealt with quickly, night staffing was not enough for some evacuation needs, and systems for as-needed medicines were not safe enough.
Records about risks, health care, hydration and care planning were sometimes incomplete. The home’s checks had not found or fixed many of these problems. The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Caring was rated Good, while Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Requires Improvement.
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with kindness and dignity. Staff knew people well and supported their independence.
“People were treated with kindness and were positive about the staff's caring attitude.” from the report
Safeguarding
Staff understood how to report abuse and had received suitable, up-to-date training.
“The provider had effective safeguarding systems in place and staff had a good understanding of what to do to make sure people were protected from avoidable harm or abuse.” from the report
End of life wishes
People were offered the chance to discuss and record what they wanted at the end of their lives.
“People had been offered the opportunity to discuss their end of life care wishes if they wanted to.” from the report
Fire safety and evacuation
seriousPeople were placed at risk because fire safety measures were not dealt with promptly. There were also too few night staff to meet some people’s evacuation needs.
“People had been placed at risk due to fire safety measures not being actioned in a timely manner and having insufficient staffing numbers to evacuate people in the event of a fire.” from the report
As-needed medicines
seriousInstructions for giving as-needed medicines were not sufficient, and the times some medicines were given were not recorded. Some people could not access all their as-needed medicines at night until action was taken after the inspection.
“The provider failed to have sufficient systems in place to ensure the safe administration of 'as required' (PRN) medicines.” from the report
Management oversight
seriousThe home’s quality checks had not identified most of the problems found. There were gaps in fire, bedrail and water outlet checks, and no clear action plans with timescales.
“Governance systems had failed to identify and address the shortfalls found at inspection.” from the report
Staffing levels
needs fixingRelatives reported staff shortages at times. The tool used to decide staffing numbers and skills was not effective.
“A relative told us, "Sometimes there are not enough staff about when I visit.” from the report
Incomplete care records
needs fixingSome records did not give enough information about people’s risks, health needs, hydration or the care they required. Care plans were not always personalised.
“Some people's care records contained limited information to be assured care was being delivered to meet their needs including monitoring records and risk management.” from the report
Complaints handling
minorThe complaints log contained limited information about outcomes and lessons learned. The CQC recommended that the provider seek advice about managing and learning from complaints.
“There was a basic log of complaints with limited information including any outcomes and lessons learnt.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to fire safety, and how many staff are now available at night to evacuate everyone safely?
- 02How are as-needed medicines now authorised, given and recorded, including pain relief at night?
- 03How do you check that staffing numbers and staff skills match people’s needs at all times?
- 04What action plans and regular checks are now in place for fire safety, bedrails, building maintenance and unused water outlets?
- 05How are complaints recorded, investigated and used to make improvements?
This was the first planned inspection of the newly registered service, covering all five CQC question areas and infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 May 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.
Every inspection of Yarborough House RCH
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- May 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2020Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- March 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 December 2020.
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
12 live-in carers within about an hour of North East Lincolnshire
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 £1,350 a week. 10 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
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.