CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Voyage

The Red House

49 Wharncliffe Road, Ilkeston, Derby, DE7 5GF

Requires improvementpublished 3 February 2024, 2 years ago

Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.

The five questions inspectors ask

Safe?: Requires improvement; Some safety checks and cleaning were not reliable. Inspectors found problems with hot water temperatures, fire prevention, mould and a stained carpet, although the provider acted on the concerns raised.
Effective?: Requires improvement; The principles of the Mental Capacity Act were not always followed when people were charged for the care home vehicle. Care planning, staff training, meals and access to health care were otherwise described positively.
Caring?: Good; This key question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its rating was not stated in the supplied report.
Responsive?: Good; This key question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its rating was not stated in the supplied report.
Well-led?: Requires improvement; Quality monitoring and governance did not reliably identify or resolve safety problems. Inspectors also found that the transport charging policy had not been put into practice.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, February 2024

Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found caring support but important safety, consent and management checks were not reliable.

This was a focused inspection carried out over three visits in November 2023. One inspector spoke with people, staff, family members and health and social care professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, risk assessments, staff recruitment records, policies and other records.

The home supported seven people with learning disabilities and autistic people. Staff generally knew people well, supported their independence and interests, and provided enough trained staff. Medicines, safeguarding, health care and incident reporting were managed well.

However, some parts of the building were unsafe or unhygienic. Checks on hot water, fire safety and cleaning had not worked properly. People were also charged for use of the home vehicle without the required best-interest decisions or clear evidence of consent.

The overall rating changed from Good in 2018 to Requires Improvement. The home must improve its quality monitoring and governance. The CQC will ask for an action plan and monitor progress with the provider and local authority.

What inspectors praised

Kind and individual support
Staff understood people's individual needs and supported their choices, independence, interests and goals.
“Staff placed people's wishes, needs, and rights at the heart of everything they did.” from the report
Enough trained staff
The home had enough staff with the training and skills needed to support people safely.
“People were supported by enough staff who had the necessary training and skills.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Medicines were administered, recorded and stored safely, with staff competency checked.
“People were supported by staff who followed the provider's systems and processes to administer, record, and store medicines safely.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked with health and social care services and supported people to attend health checks and specialist services.
“The service worked well in partnership with community health and social care organisations, which helped improve the wellbeing of the people who used the service.” from the report

What inspectors were concerned about

Unsafe building checks
serious
Hot water checks were not carried out correctly, and fire prevention work identified as serious had not been completed. These problems increased the potential risk of harm.
“The provider had not implemented some required fire prevention measures.” from the report
Poor cleanliness
needs fixing
Inspectors found significant black mould in an ensuite shower room and a heavily stained, unhygienic bedroom carpet.
“People lived in an environment which was not always clean and hygienic.” from the report
Unclear vehicle charges
serious
People were charged weekly for the home vehicle without evidence of consent or best-interest decisions. Some people paid even when the vehicle was not available for their use.
“People were therefore being charged significant amounts by the provider for travel costs which there was no evidence they had consented to.” from the report
Weak quality monitoring
serious
Audits did not consistently identify problems or ensure that identified actions were completed. This led to risks not being dealt with promptly.
“The provider failed to establish effective governance processes to assess, monitor, and mitigate the risks relating to the health, safety, and welfare of service users.” from the report

Questions to ask them, based on this report

01What has been done to confirm that hot water temperatures are now checked correctly and safely?
02Has all outstanding fire safety work been completed, including the gaps in the service ducting?
03Has the black mould been removed and has the stained bedroom carpet been deep cleaned or replaced?
04Have transport charges stopped, and how will best-interest decisions and other travel options be considered for each person?
05What changes have been made to quality audits so that problems are identified, acted on and checked as completed?

This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected, and the other ratings carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 February 2024 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of The Red House

3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.

February 2024Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from Good
Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at The Red House →
March 2018Goodstayed Good
Safe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk
June 2016Good
Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read this report on cqc.org.uk
June 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 June 2014.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.

Another option

Or stay at home with a private carer

Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.

About live-in care How PrimeCarers works

Same provider

Other services run by Voyage 1 Limited

240 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.