CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Acorn Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm. Medicines, staffing, safeguarding and infection control were found to be managed safely, although some mental capacity records were contradictory.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with dignity and respect, offered choices and sought consent. People told inspectors they were listened to and liked living in the home.
- Responsive?
- Requires improvement
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Management and governance had improved, with audits covering medicines and care records. Some audits and actions were not dated, and some records needed further checking.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Acorn Nursing Home rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and clear improvements, but some records and audits still needed tightening.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 30 March and 18 April 2023. Two inspectors spoke with people and staff, reviewed care, medicines, accident and recruitment records, and observed care and the home.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Caring and Well-led were each rated Good. Inspectors found medicines were managed safely, staff treated people with dignity, and management systems had improved.
Some mental capacity records were contradictory, and some audits and records were not dated. Inspectors made two recommendations, but found these issues had not affected the care people received.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement, with three breaches. The provider had completed an action plan, and inspectors found the home was no longer in breach of regulations.
Safe medicines
Medicines were administered, recorded and stored correctly. Staff understood people's medicines, including when medicines needed to be given at particular times.
“Procedures in place for the management of medicines ensured medicines were administered, recorded and stored correctly.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw positive interactions and staff spending time with people. People were offered choices and asked for consent.
“Throughout the inspection we observed positive interactions with people living in the home and, we saw staff spent time engaging with people.” from the report
Improved management
The provider had improved its oversight since the previous inspection. Audits were completed across medicines and care records, and staff felt included.
“There were effective systems for the governance and oversight of the service.” from the report
Stable staff team
The rota was mostly covered by permanent staff who had worked at the home for many years. Staff spoke positively about the culture and their colleagues.
“The culture amongst the staff was positive with many staff describing their peers as "family".” from the report
Mental capacity paperwork
needs fixingSome electronic capacity assessments and best-interest decisions contradicted each other. The provider said this was a training issue and promised to review the records.
“We found some contradictions in the newly developed electronic records for the assessment of people's capacity and the associated best interest decisions.” from the report
Records and audit dates
needs fixingSome records and audits were not dated, and some care records needed checking for accuracy. Inspectors recommended that documents and audits should be dated consistently.
“However, on some occasions these were not dated, or the completion of the actions was not dated.” from the report
Expired fire training
minorSome fire training had expired, although it had been scheduled to take place as soon as possible.
“Some fire training had recently expired but this was scheduled to take place as soon as practically possible.” from the report
- 01How have you checked and corrected the contradictory mental capacity and best-interest records?
- 02How do you make sure audits, actions and care records are dated and kept accurate?
- 03Has all expired fire training now been completed, and how do you monitor staff training dates?
- 04What were the previous ratings for Effective and Responsive, which were not assessed in this inspection?
- 05How are the two recommendations from this inspection being followed up?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Caring and Well-led; Effective and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over into the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 May 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, April 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found progress since an Inadequate rating and Special Measures, but medicines, records, privacy and management still needed urgent improvement.
Inspectors visited on 15 and 16 February and 3 March 2022. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment and management records. They also checked infection control and COVID-19 vaccination requirements.
The home had improved from its previous Inadequate rating and was no longer in Special Measures. Inspectors found enough improvement in staffing, safety checks, infection control and support for people's health, nutrition and choices.
However, medicines were not always recorded or managed safely. Care records were not always accurate or personal to the individual. People's privacy and dignity were not always protected, and audits did not consistently find or fix problems. The overall rating and the ratings for Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were Requires Improvement. Effective was rated Good.
Quick help and staffing
People said staff responded quickly when they needed help. Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw call bells answered swiftly.
“We observed staff answered call bells and responded to people needs swiftly.” from the report
Kind and knowledgeable care
Staff knew people's needs and were caring when giving medicines and providing support. People and relatives said they felt cared for.
“People were cared for in a safe, clean and homely environment by staff who were caring, competent and knowledgeable about their needs.” from the report
Health support
Staff sought medical and specialist advice quickly when needed. Inspectors found examples where this led to better health outcomes.
“Staff referred people to specialist professionals for support and guidance.” from the report
Choice and involvement
People were offered day-to-day choices and were involved in decisions about their care. The home also held meetings and gathered feedback.
“People and relatives told us they were involved in the support provided and in deciding the care needed.” from the report
Activities and relationships
The home offered activities and supported people to keep in touch with people important to them. Inspectors saw people enjoying an art session.
“We observed people taking part in an art session. People were helped if this was needed and people were smiling and chatting as they took part.” from the report
Medicines records
seriousMedicine administration records were not always complete or clear. Inspectors could not be sure that some time-specific, high-risk and patch medicines had been given properly.
“Medicines administration records were not always completed fully and accurately.” from the report
Privacy and dignity
seriousSome older care records used inappropriate language, and personal medical information was discussed where others could hear. This was a continued breach.
“Personal information was not always kept private.” from the report
Weak checks
seriousManagement audits did not consistently identify problems. Medicines audits had not been completed for three months, and staff medicine competency assessments had not been completed.
“Robust audits and checks were not always completed to monitor the quality and safety of services provided.” from the report
- 01How are you now checking that medicines administration records are complete, accurate and clear for high-risk and time-specific medicines?
- 02How do you make sure each person's care plan gives accurate, person-centred instructions about diets, repositioning, behaviour and bedrail covers?
- 03What has changed to protect people's privacy and dignity, including the language used in care records and discussions about medical conditions?
- 04Have monthly medicines audits and staff competency assessments been completed consistently since the inspection?
- 05What progress has been made with the action plan sent to CQC, and what further monitoring has taken place?
This was a follow-up inspection after an earlier Inadequate rating and Special Measures, covering all five key questions and including infection prevention and COVID-19 vaccination checks. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 April 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 Acorn Nursing Home
6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- April 2022Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2022Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 December 2010.
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
32 live-in carers within about an hour of Blackpool
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 £1,250 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
“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.