CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Abney Low Nursing home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Anchorage Nursing Home was rated Inadequate and remains in special measures, with serious concerns about safety, staffing, medicines and management.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 19 and 24 October 2023. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care and checked care plans, medicine records, staff files and management audits.
Inspectors found that risks were not always managed safely. Care records did not consistently show that people received repositioning, food, fluids or other planned care. There were also concerns about medicines, the building, infection control and staffing levels.
The home was rated Inadequate overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were rated Inadequate. Caring and Responsive were rated Requires Improvement. The home had also been rated Inadequate at the previous inspection in July 2023, and inspectors said enough improvement had not been made.
Kind staff
Most people said staff respected them and treated them well. Staff also said they knew people's needs and how they wanted to be supported.
“The staff who are here are all very kind and helpful” from the report
Family visits
People could receive visitors when they wished, and inspectors saw family members visiting during the inspection.
“People were free to visit at any time in line with current government guidance.” from the report
Access to GPs
People could see a GP when needed, and referrals to other professionals were made when required.
“People told us, and records showed that people could see a GP when they needed to.” from the report
Some building improvements
Inspectors saw refurbishment in communal areas and noted that a new lift had been installed since the previous inspection.
“A new lift had been installed in the service since the last inspection.” from the report
People at risk of harm
seriousCare plans did not always explain how risks should be reduced, and records did not show that planned repositioning and fluid support had always been provided.
“Risks were not always managed safely, as identified risks were not robustly mitigated.” from the report
Unsafe medicines management
seriousMedicine records and stock balances were incomplete. Storage temperatures were not checked properly, some medicines and substances were not stored safely, and competency checks were missing for some staff.
“The provider failed to ensure medicines were managed safely, this was a continued breach of regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.” from the report
Not enough staff
seriousPeople, relatives and staff described delays in getting support, particularly at weekends. An observation of care had to be abandoned because there was not enough staff presence and interaction.
“There were not always enough staff available to support people in a timely way.” from the report
Food and fluids
seriousInspectors could not be assured that people received the fortified food and fluids they needed. Care records did not always match the support provided.
“People's nutrition and hydration needs were not always met adequately.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousAudits often identified problems, but the home did not consistently fix them. Inspectors found the same issues again, including problems with medicines and the kitchen.
“Systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service were not effective.” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingAlthough an activities timetable was displayed, many people said there was little to do and that they felt lonely. People said there were no activities outside the home.
“Quite often the residents are just left sitting for hours with nothing to do.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to staffing levels, especially at weekends, and how are delays in care now monitored?
- 02How are medicines now stored, including fridge and room temperature checks, and how have all staff been assessed as competent to administer them?
- 03How do you check that people receive the repositioning, food, fortified diets and fluids set out in their care plans?
- 04What action has been taken to fix the environmental and infection control concerns, including the dirty kitchen, equipment and fire doors?
- 05How are audits, complaints and safeguarding actions now followed through, and how can relatives see evidence that problems have been fixed?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection covering all five key questions, the premises and the care provided, after the previous Inadequate rating and required improvements. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 December 2023 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, July 2023
Rated Inadequate and in special measures; inspectors found serious safety, medicines, staffing and leadership failures.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 29 and 31 March 2023. Two inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines, staff records and management records.
The home was not safe or well-led. Risks were not always assessed or managed, medicines were not always given as prescribed, fire safety recommendations had not been followed, and many staff had not completed important training.
Care records were often incomplete or out of date. The home did not consistently follow the legal rules about consent, and care was not always personalised. Inspectors did see kind and patient interactions, but rated Caring and Responsive as Requires Improvement.
The overall rating is Inadequate. The home has been placed in special measures, meaning CQC will keep it under review and normally re-inspect within six months to check for significant improvement.
Safeguarding procedures
The home had safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures. Staff understood how to report concerns, and safeguarding referrals were recorded well.
“There were effective systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuse” from the report
Kind interactions
Inspectors saw staff responding kindly and patiently. Staff encouraged people to express everyday choices.
“We observed staff being kind in their response to people and their approach was patient.” from the report
Privacy and independence
Staff knocked before entering bedrooms and encouraged people to be as independent as possible.
“We observed staff respecting people's privacy and independence.” from the report
Safe recruitment checks
The provider carried out Disclosure and Barring Service checks for applicants.
“The provider followed safe recruitment practices.” from the report
Meal choices
People were supported to choose meals and snacks. Staff accommodated a request for food that was different from the menu.
“People were supported to make choices about meals and snacks.” from the report
Risk management
seriousRisk assessments were not always updated or followed. One person at high risk of falls did not have equipment identified as needed to reduce harm.
“People were at an increased risk of harm as risk assessments were not always updated or followed.” from the report
Medicines
seriousSome medicines did not have clear instructions or records for staff. Only 25% of staff had completed medicines training and competency checks.
“Medicines were not managed safely.” from the report
Fire safety
seriousThe home had not acted on fire risks identified by the fire service. Fire safety training compliance was 77%.
“The provider had failed to act upon fire risks highlighted in a report issued by Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service” from the report
Staff training and support
needs fixingTraining completion was low in several important areas, and there were no records showing that staff had received suitable supervision or appraisal.
“Staff did not always receive the support and training for their role.” from the report
Care records and personalisation
seriousCare plans and care records were incomplete or out of date. They did not consistently explain people's individual needs, choices or how staff should provide care.
“People did not receive care that was consistently person centred, and which considered their individual needs or promote choice and control.” from the report
Leadership and oversight
seriousThe home's quality systems failed to identify and resolve ongoing problems. The manager in post was not registered with CQC and left during the inspection process.
“The provider did not have oversight of the service and had failed to ensure effective support and leadership since registering the service in April 2022.” from the report
- 01What action has been completed to address the fire service recommendations, including the smoking area and the locked escape gate?
- 02How do you now make sure medicines, including as-required medicines and medicated creams, are given and recorded correctly?
- 03What percentage of staff have now completed medicines, fire safety, moving and handling and safeguarding training?
- 04How are care plans being updated when people's needs, communication needs or end of life wishes change?
- 05What regular checks, meetings or audits are now in place to identify and correct problems?
This was the first comprehensive inspection of the newly registered service, covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control; the previous provider had been rated Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 July 2023 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 Abney Low Nursing home
7 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Requires improvement to Inadequate.
- December 2023Inadequatecurrent ratingstayed InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- July 2023Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2021Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2021Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2020Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- April 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 April 2022.
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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Wirral
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 £1,230 a week. 37 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during 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.