CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Alexander Court Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Alexander Court Care Centre was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements during a COVID-19 outbreak.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 8 February 2022. Inspectors checked infection prevention and control, and asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
They were assured that the home used personal protective equipment safely, followed testing and isolation guidance, kept the building clean, and managed outbreaks by zoning affected units. Visiting arrangements included testing, protective equipment and a visitor booth during outbreaks.
The home had enough staff to meet people's needs at the time of the visit. Some staff were self-isolating, but agency staff were used and the report says assessed staffing levels were maintained.
The service was inspected but not rated. Only the Safe question was inspected, and it was also marked inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating.
Infection control
The home had testing, PPE, cleaning and outbreak arrangements in place. Inspectors were assured that these measures were being followed.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
The home supported visits while trying to reduce infection risks. During outbreaks, a visitor booth allowed window visits, with exceptions for essential care givers and people visiting someone receiving end of life care.
“The provider was facilitating visits for people living in the home in accordance with the latest government guidance.” from the report
Staffing cover
COVID-19 caused some staff absences, but the home used agency staff and maintained its assessed staffing levels at the inspection.
“Agency staff were recruited to cover when needed and records showed the provider was able to maintain their assessed staffing levels.” from the report
Clean premises
A daily cleaning schedule and infection control audits were used to support hygiene in the home.
“There was a daily cleaning schedule in place to ensure the premises was kept clean and to maintain hygiene, which helped prevent the spread of infections.” from the report
Staff absence pressures
minorThere were staffing pressures because many staff had to self-isolate after catching COVID-19. The report says agency staff were brought in and staffing levels were maintained during the inspection.
“There were some staffing pressures due to a high number of staff that had to self isolate after catching COVID-19.” from the report
- 01How are staffing levels maintained now when permanent staff are off sick or self-isolating?
- 02What visiting arrangements are used during a COVID-19 or other infection outbreak?
- 03How are visitors, staff and professionals tested before entering the home?
- 04How are affected units separated if there is an infection outbreak?
- 05What cleaning and infection control audits are carried out, and how are any problems followed up?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other key questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 February 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.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Inspected but not rated; the targeted visit found infection controls and safety systems in place, while the previous overall rating remained Good.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 28 April 2021. Inspectors checked specific concerns about infection prevention, people's safety and management. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers, and reviewed care records, risk assessments, recruitment files and quality records.
Inspectors were assured about infection control. The home had testing, personal protective equipment, cleaning routines and arrangements for visits. They also found safeguarding procedures, risk assessments, emergency plans and systems for learning from accidents and complaints.
The inspection looked only at selected parts of Safe and Well-led. These questions were recorded as inspected but not rated. The previous overall rating was Good and remained Good because this targeted inspection did not change ratings.
Infection control
The home had arrangements for testing, protective equipment, cleaning, social distancing and visits. Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed.
“We were assured that the provider was preventing visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
Managing risks
People had risk assessments covering areas such as falls, pressure sores, medicines and nutrition. These were reviewed when people's needs changed.
“There were systems in place to minimise risks to people.” from the report
Safeguarding
Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse. Records showed that concerns were reported to the relevant safeguarding authorities.
“Staff knew how to identify and respond to abuse and who to report safeguarding concerns to.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The home reviewed accidents, complaints and mistakes, then updated care plans, risk assessments and staff training where needed.
“There were systems in place to learn from lessons following incidents and accidents.” from the report
Management checks
Audits covered medicines records, infection control and the home environment. Staff meetings were used to share information and discuss concerns.
“There were quality assurance systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and to improve the delivery of care and support.” from the report
Earlier complaints about care
needs fixingBefore this inspection, relatives had made formal complaints about the standard of care. The manager apologised, introduced improvements and records showed action had been taken, but families should ask what has changed in practice.
“Prior to our inspection we were notified of formal complaints made by relatives about the standard of care received by their family members.” from the report
Recent staffing difficulties
minorThe manager said the previous year had been difficult because of the pandemic and staff-related issues. Inspectors said this was being managed with support from the provider.
“The registered manager told us the past year had been difficult due to the COVID-19 pandemic and staff related issues.” from the report
- 01What were the formal complaints about care, and what changes were made as a result?
- 02How do you check that the extra staff training on risk assessments, skin care and repositioning is being followed?
- 03How are current staffing levels and staff-related issues affecting people's care?
- 04How often are infection control, medicines records and the home environment audited?
- 05How will relatives be kept informed if a person's needs or risks change?
This was a targeted inspection of specific parts of Safe and Well-led, mainly infection control, safety risks and management; the other areas were not assessed and the previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 May 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.
Every inspection of Alexander Court Care Centre
3 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- June 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2018Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 July 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Barking and Dagenham
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. 79 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“She is a safe pair of hands and her years of experience certainly shine through.”
“Charity would take Nan on holidays day trips and shopping adventures”
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.