CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Agnes Court - Care Home with Nursing Physical Disabilities
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infections, using protective equipment safely, arranging testing and managing admissions. They did not give a safety rating.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Agnes Court was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control measures were in place.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 20 November 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found good practice. They were assured that the home was using personal protective equipment safely, arranging testing, managing admissions, cleaning frequently touched surfaces and keeping its infection control policy up to date.
The home had measures for visitors, including temperature checks, declarations and protective equipment. It had also created a garden visiting suite and was preparing a screened indoor visiting area.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a full rating for all five areas of care.
Protective equipment and training
The home had enough protective equipment and trained staff in infection control and its correct use. People were also given learning sessions about why protective equipment was needed.
“There was a sufficient stock of the PPE and the provider's head office was responsible for ensuring the PPE supplied complied with the quality standards.” from the report
Safe admissions
New admissions and people returning from hospital could only enter after a negative test result had been confirmed. The management team also understood the plans for separating groups if needed.
“There was a system to ensure safe admissions, this included allowing a new admission or a person returning from hospital, only after a negative result of the test had been confirmed.” from the report
Visitor arrangements
Visitors were given infection control instructions and protective equipment where needed. The home had installed a garden visiting suite and was preparing a screened indoor visiting area.
“A garden visiting suite had been installed to safely facilitate relatives' visits when the weather allowed.” from the report
Cleaning and checks
Extra cleaning tasks had been added, including cleaning frequently touched surfaces. Regular checks had led to changes, including another laundry room.
“Additional cleaning schedules had been introduced to reflect additional tasks such as cleaning of the frequently touched surfaces.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What is the home's current overall CQC rating, since this inspection was not rated?
- 02How are new admissions and people returning from hospital tested and managed now?
- 03What arrangements are currently in place for relatives to visit indoors and outdoors?
- 04How often are staff and residents tested for infections, and what happens after a positive result?
- 05What improvements have followed the cleaning audits and the introduction of the additional laundry room?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; it did not provide ratings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 December 2020 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, March 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a new manager due to take over after the inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection on 21 February 2019. Two inspectors observed care, spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe, received medicines correctly, and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
Inspectors found care plans were detailed and personalised. People were supported with food, health appointments, communication, mobility, activities and making their own choices.
The registered manager had left. An experienced interim manager was in place, and a newly appointed manager was due to start the following month. Some work was still under way to improve records for medicines taken when needed. The previous inspection in July 2016 was also rated Good.
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found enough suitably checked staff, detailed risk guidance and medicines given safely and on time.
“People were safe and protected from avoidable harm. Legal requirements were met.” from the report
Accessible environment
The building was designed for people who use wheelchairs. Bedrooms and corridors gave people room to move safely.
“The service was a purpose built to cater for people that used a wheelchair to mobilise, the corridors were suitably wide and the bedrooms big enough for people to move freely.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People described staff positively, and inspectors observed warm relationships. Staff respected privacy, dignity, communication needs and independence.
“Our observations reflected staff were kind and built meaningful caring relationships with people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's routines, choices, interests and preferred ways of receiving care. People were involved in reviewing their plans.
“People's preferred daily routines were recorded in depth and provided staff with details of how the person wanted their day structured.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used audits and an improvement plan to identify and track work. People were also asked for their views about activities, menus and refurbishment plans.
“There were a number of effective in-house audits that covered areas such as care documentation, medicines and health and safety.” from the report
Managerial change
needs fixingThere was no registered manager at the inspection. An interim manager was providing cover, while a newly appointed manager was due to start the following month.
“Following the departure of the registered manager the provider ensured there was sufficient managerial cover provided.” from the report
Medicine protocols still being completed
needs fixingThe home was still working to ensure all protocols for medicines taken when needed were in place. Inspectors said this work was being addressed.
“For example, one of the tasks in progress was to ensure all people's protocols for 'when required' medicines were in place.” from the report
- 01Who is the registered manager now, and how was the handover from the interim manager completed?
- 02How do you make sure every person's protocol for medicines taken when needed is current and available to staff?
- 03How are people's individual communication methods recorded and shared with new or temporary staff?
- 04How are care plan reviews carried out, and how can the person and their family contribute?
- 05What improvements were made to the kitchen and dining area after the refurbishment work mentioned in the report?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions; the previous inspection in July 2016 was also rated Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 March 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.
Every inspection of Agnes Court - Care Home with Nursing Physical Disabilities
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Agnes Court - Care Home with Nursing Physical Disabilities →
- March 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Agnes Court - Care Home with Nursing Physical Disabilities →
- July 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 January 2011.
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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Oxfordshire
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 £1,300 a week. 32 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.