You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 22 March 2018

Caroline House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Caroline House accommodates up to 28 people in one adapted building. There were 26 people living at the home at the time of the inspection. Caroline House is a residential care service that provides support for older people living with dementia, mental health needs and sensory impairment. Accommodation was arranged over two floors with stairs and a lift connecting each level.

At our last inspection we rated the service good overall. At the last inspection, the provider had failed to adequately assess the risks to the health and safety of service users which was a breach of Regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The provider had taken sufficient steps to ensure that health and safety had been assessed and improvements made to ensure risks were minimised. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good overall. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At this inspection we found the service remained overall Good.

There is a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.'

People told us they felt safe at the service and staff understood what procedures they needed to follow to keep people safe. Risks to people's health and safety were assessed and measures were put in place such as updating fire evacuation procedures. Safety checks of the environment and equipment were carried out to ensure they were in good working order. The service was currently working above their identified staffing levels.

Staff had development plans in place which ensured that they were supported to complete training and gain qualifications. People's nutritional needs were met and staff sought advice from healthcare professionals in relation to people's diets. People said they liked the food and staff knew what they likes and didn’t like. People were supported to access health services such as GPs, speech and language therapists and district nurses.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were happy at the home and liked the staff and other people they lived with. People told us they thought the care they received was excellent People were enabled to maintain relationships with their families and friends.

People told us that they were involved in their care. People had their preferences taken into consideration such as tailoring activities for people and decorating their bedrooms in a style that they liked.

The registered manager was approachable and staff felt able to be open. Staff and people who use the service were encouraged to give their views and put forward ideas for improving the service. People told us they knew who the manager was and found her approachable,

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection areas



Updated 22 March 2018

The service remains Requires Improvement. .

People felt safe at the service and staff knew about safeguarding procedures.

Risks were assessed and mitigations and actions were put in place when necessary.

Medicines were managed and stored safely.

Reviews of incidents were carried out and steps put in place to prevent further incidents.



Updated 22 March 2018

The service remains Good.

Staff received training relevant to their roles and were supported to develop.

People were supported to maintain healthy diets and had their nutritional needs appropriately assessed and supported.

People received appropriate care and treatment in line with guidance from other healthcare professionals.

Premises were suitably adapted to meet people's needs.



Updated 22 March 2018

The service remains Good.

People were supported to be independent and make daily choices.

People's had their dignity maintained and were smartly dressed.

People liked the service and had a good rapport with staff.



Updated 22 March 2018

The service remains Good.

People had their preferences and choices respected and were able to choose how they spent their time.

There was an accessible complaints process in place and when concerns were raised, they were fully investigated.

People who were reaching the end stages of their life had their wishes taken into consideration.



Updated 22 March 2018

The service remains Good.

There was a registered manager in place.

Staff said that they were able to be open and the manager was approachable.

The quality of the service was assessed an monitored and actions were implemented as a result of audits.

People were encouraged to give their feedback on the service and input into how the service was run.