CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Agnes House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured Agnes House had infection control measures in place.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 August 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable measures for visitors, shielding, social distancing, admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, cleaning and managing outbreaks.
The home had an infection control plan, enough protective equipment and extra cleaning time. Staff and visitors were risk assessed, and regular testing was in place.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most of the five areas.
Infection control plan
The provider had a detailed plan to guide infection prevention and control.
“The provider ensured guidance was provided through a detailed infection, prevention and protection plan.” from the report
Cleaning and protective equipment
Extra cleaning time was provided, and staff had training and enough protective equipment.
“Additional time had been allocated to ensure the home was cleaned on a rotational basis to minimise the risk of infection.” from the report
Testing and admissions
The home took part in regular testing and waited for test results before admitting people from hospital.
“No-one was admitted to the service from hospital until their test result was confirmed.” from the report
Visitor arrangements
Visitors were risk assessed and supported by arrangements for rotational visits.
“Any visitors had been risk assessed and arrangements were in place to support rotational visits.” from the report
Staff support
The provider employed extra staff during the pandemic and assessed risks for staff returning after shielding or isolation.
“Extra staff had been employed to support the home during the pandemic.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Are the infection prevention and control arrangements described in the report still in place?
- 02How often are staff and residents tested now, and what happens when someone has a positive result?
- 03How are visitors currently risk assessed and supported during visits?
- 04How often are communal areas and bedrooms cleaned, and how is this checked?
- 05What ratings or inspection information is available for care, staffing, medicines and management, which this inspection did not assess?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures during the coronavirus pandemic; the other key areas were not assessed and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 January 2021 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, December 2018
Agnes House was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with no serious concerns.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 14 November 2018. Inspectors spoke with six people living at the home, three relatives and staff. They reviewed care records, medicines, staffing, accidents, incidents and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and well cared for. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, personalised care plans, suitable activities and good support with health needs.
The home was clean and well maintained. Staff were trained and understood people's needs, including dementia care. People and relatives were involved in decisions, and the home supported people with end-of-life care.
The overall rating remained Good since the previous inspection in April 2016. The Responsive rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good. The report found no evidence of serious risks or concerns.
People felt safe
People said staff were available and responded when they needed help. Inspectors found risk assessments and staffing arrangements that supported safety.
“I feel safe because there is always someone around.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People described staff as caring and patient. Inspectors found that people were involved in decisions and treated with dignity.
“The staff always knock before entering my room.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans gave staff clear instructions about how people wanted their care provided. The plans were reviewed when people's needs changed.
“People's care plans were personalised and provided clear instructions to staff on how to meet people's needs in the way they wanted.” from the report
Good end-of-life support
Staff understood the needs of people nearing the end of their lives. Relatives could stay on site, and spiritual support was available.
“People were supported at the end of their lives to have a comfortable, dignified and pain-free death.” from the report
Listening and checking
Managers used audits to check the quality of care and invited feedback from people, relatives and staff. Shortfalls found through audits were addressed.
“The registered manager carried out audits to ensure the home was running effectively.” from the report
Cultural needs were not fully recorded at first
minorThe assessment paperwork did not initially show that people's cultural needs had been fully assessed. The manager updated the form during the inspection and showed inspectors the improved version.
“The home's assessment documentation was mostly detailed but did not show that people's cultural needs were fully assessed.” from the report
- 01How will you assess and record my relative's cultural and religious needs before they move in?
- 02How will you make sure my relative receives their medicines on time and that their medicines are regularly reviewed?
- 03What activities would be available for my relative, and how would you adapt them to their preferences and abilities?
- 04How would you respond if my relative's health or mobility needs changed?
- 05What support would be available to my relative and our family if they needed end-of-life care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions; the previous Responsive rating of Requires Improvement had improved to Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 December 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 Agnes House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leicester
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 £1,270 a week. 83 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“Tino was the most wonderfully rounded, empathetic and intuitive person. He not only developed a great relationship with Neville but also had a great working relationship with our existing carer.”
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.