CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Abbeymoor Neurodisability Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Abbeymoor Neurodisability Centre was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with major improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 18 October, 4 November and 14 November 2019. The inspector reviewed records, spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care and checked medicines, recruitment, training and management systems.
The home provided nursing and residential care for up to 41 people, with 26 people living there at the time. Inspectors found all five areas were Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
The home had improved from Requires improvement at the previous inspection. Inspectors found better equipment checks, fire safety, care records, mealtime support and handling of covert medicines. They also found people were respected, involved in decisions and supported to communicate and take part in activities.
Improved safety
Problems identified at the previous inspection had been addressed. Equipment, the environment and fire safety arrangements were found to be safe and well maintained.
“The environment and equipment were safe and well maintained.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. They explained what was happening and supported people to be as independent as possible.
“Staff consistently displayed kindness and a caring attitude when working with people.” from the report
Strong management
Inspectors found the service was well run, with regular quality checks and a manager who acted on feedback and sought further improvements.
“The registered manager provided strong leadership and their constant critical review of the service had led to noticeable improvements.” from the report
Activity provision during staff change
minorThe activity coordinators had retired shortly before the inspection and a new coordinator was still being recruited. This could affect continuity of activities, so families may want to ask what is currently available.
“People and relatives told us the new activity coordinator would have 'big act to follow.'” from the report
- 01What activities are available now while the new activity coordinator is being appointed?
- 02How do you check that the improvements made since the previous inspection are being maintained?
- 03How are people involved in decisions about their care, meals, activities and recruitment?
- 04How do you support people who have limited verbal communication to express their choices?
- 05How do you make sure there are enough suitably trained staff, including nurses, on each shift?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the care and premises of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 December 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, October 2018
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found progress since an Inadequate rating, but serious safety, care records, staffing and management issues remained.
Inspectors made unannounced visits on 22 August, 7 September and 13 September 2018. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care, meals and activities, and checked care records, medicines, the building and management records.
The home had improved since January 2018, when it was rated Inadequate overall and breached four regulations. However, inspectors found that improvements were still new and needed to become consistent. All five areas were rated Requires Improvement.
Inspectors found concerns about evacuation arrangements, access to nurse call alarms, staffing for required checks, inaccurate or incomplete care records, staff training and people's independence. They also found strengths, including safe medicines procedures, appropriate recruitment checks, healthcare referrals and investigations of complaints.
The provider was still in breach of Regulations 12, 17 and 18. The provider had to send CQC an action plan, and CQC said it would check whether the required action was taken.
Medicines
Inspectors found that medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Staff who gave medicines had training and competency checks.
“We looked through the medication administration records (MAR's) and found medicines had been administered and recorded correctly.” from the report
Recruitment and staffing
The provider had increased staffing levels and carried out checks before employing staff.
“The provider's recruitment processes minimised the risk of unsuitable staff being employed.” from the report
Healthcare support
People were referred to relevant healthcare professionals when needed, including dietitians and mental health professionals.
“We found staff ensured people were appropriately referred to other healthcare professionals.” from the report
Complaints were investigated
People and relatives had raised concerns, and inspectors found these had been investigated and resolved.
“We found people had raised a number of issues that the registered manager had thoroughly investigated and resolved.” from the report
Fire evacuation
seriousThe fire risk assessment did not explain how people would be evacuated or identify clear risks. One route was narrow and blocked, and there was only one evacuation chair.
“Although a fire risk assessment had been completed by an external contractor this did not provide a plan for the management of evacuation or identify clear risks.” from the report
Access to help
seriousPeople could not use nurse call alarms in bedrooms, communal areas or bathrooms. This could make it difficult for some people to request assistance.
“People could not access nurse call alarms in bedrooms, the communal areas or bathrooms” from the report
Incomplete care records
seriousSome records missed important information, including epilepsy and mental health needs, or contained information that was inaccurate or presumptive.
“However, we still found some were inaccurate.” from the report
Staff training
seriousStaff had not been trained to work with people described as having learning disabilities or mental health needs. Inspectors found this led to people's needs being misunderstood.
“This lack of training led to staff misidentifying people's needs.” from the report
Independence and choice
needs fixingPeople were sometimes moved or told where to sit without being asked. Drinks were offered at set times, rather than people being supported to have them when they wanted.
“Staff were not always sensitive to people's needs, people who were chair bound were left in communal lounges for long durations of time unaccompanied.” from the report
- 01What has been done to make sure every person can summon help from their bedroom, bathroom and communal areas?
- 02How would my relative be evacuated, particularly if they use an adapted wheelchair or cannot sit upright?
- 03How do you now check that care records accurately describe epilepsy, mental health needs, communication methods and consent?
- 04What training have staff completed about acquired brain injuries and mental health needs?
- 05How can residents choose when to have drinks, where to sit and which activities or programmes to join?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions and the overall rating, with checks of care, medicines, staffing, the premises, records and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 October 2018 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 Abbeymoor Neurodisability Centre
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Abbeymoor Neurodisability Centre →
- October 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Abbeymoor Neurodisability Centre →
- March 2018InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 April 2017.
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
48 live-in carers within about an hour of Gateshead
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 £950 to £1,240 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.