CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Amherst Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found suitable recruitment checks, safe medicines processes and infection control measures, but recommended reinstating detailed monthly falls audits.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The service was managed through two deputy managers while a new manager started. Quality checks were in place, but the long absence of a registered manager had affected staff morale.
What inspectors found, October 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring support, but the rating fell from Outstanding and detailed falls checks had not been reinstated.
This was a focused inspection on 3 September 2020. Inspectors looked only at Safe and Well-led because they had received concerns about falls and staffing. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. People and relatives said they felt safe. Staff were suitably checked, medicines were managed safely, and infection control measures were in place during the pandemic. Inspectors saw staff providing calm, respectful and personalised support.
The home had been without a registered manager for nearly six months, which had affected staff morale. A new manager had started shortly before the inspection. Inspectors recommended bringing back detailed monthly falls audits. The other three key question ratings were not inspected and were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse.
“People and their relatives said they felt safe living at Amherst Court.” from the report
Kind and personalised support
Inspectors observed staff helping people understand what was being said, offering choices and reassuring people who were anxious.
“We observed staff acting according to the aims of the service to provide person-centred care.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Staff followed medicines guidance, recorded when medicines were given and checked medicine stocks and records.
“Medicines guidance was followed so people received their medicines as intended.” from the report
Pandemic infection controls
The home had cleaning arrangements, protective equipment, testing and visitor procedures in place during the pandemic.
“The service had adequate supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Detailed falls checks
needs fixingThere had been a significant number of falls. Inspectors found that more detailed monthly falls audits should be brought back to give greater assurance that risks were being addressed.
“We recommend the provider reinstates monthly falls 'deep dives', to give greater assurance that the risks of falling are being addressed.” from the report
Long management gap
needs fixingThere had been no registered manager for just under six months. The report says this affected staff morale, although a new manager had been appointed.
“There had not been a registered manager present at the service for just under six months.” from the report
Staff deployment
needs fixingSome staff felt that moving staff between units was not always effective because it could reduce staffing levels on the original unit.
“We received feedback from some staff that this was not always the most effective way to deploy staff.” from the report
- 01Have the detailed monthly falls 'deep dives' now been reinstated, and what actions have they led to?
- 02How many falls have there been since this inspection, and how are repeated falls reviewed?
- 03How has the new manager affected staff morale and day-to-day management?
- 04How are staff moved between units without leaving the original unit short of staff?
- 05What were the current ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive, given that these areas were not inspected during this visit?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were used in the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 October 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, August 2018
Amherst Court was rated Outstanding; inspectors found kind, safe and highly personalised care, with especially strong activities and leadership.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 10 and 11 April 2018. Inspectors observed care, spoke with 24 people, 13 relatives or friends, 13 staff and three health and social care professionals. They also checked care records, staff recruitment and training records, medicines, policies and quality audits.
The home continued to provide safe, effective and caring support. Inspectors found suitable staffing levels, safe medicines systems, updated risk assessments and kind, respectful staff. People's health was monitored and staff worked with outside health professionals when needed.
The strongest areas were responsive care and leadership, both rated Outstanding. Inspectors found creative activities, strong community links, care shaped around people's wishes and good systems for listening to feedback and improving the service.
The overall rating remained Outstanding, as it had been at the previous comprehensive inspection in May 2015. Safe, Effective and Caring remained Good, while Responsive and Well-led remained Outstanding.
Personalised care
Staff understood people's individual needs and found creative ways to support their choices, wellbeing and quality of life.
“Staff had an excellent understanding of people's needs and were imaginative in the way they provided person centred care which put people at the heart of the service.” from the report
Activities and community links
The home offered varied activities, including dementia-friendly technology, visits from local schoolchildren and opportunities for people to use their skills and interests.
“People continued to be helped to live fulfilled lives with the Amherst wishing well fund raising initiative.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff respond warmly and compassionately. People were supported with dignity, privacy and encouragement to do things for themselves.
“All of the staff we observed were kind and compassionate in the way they responded to requests from people for care and how they tried to meet the needs of everyone.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Is nursing care available now, given that the home was not providing nursing care at the inspection?
- 02What are the current staffing levels, and how are they adjusted when people's care needs change?
- 03What proportion of staff training is currently complete, compared with the 92% recorded in the report?
- 04Which personalised activities and community links are still available, including dementia-friendly activities?
- 05How are families involved in care reviews, complaints and decisions about changes to the service?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions; the overall rating remained unchanged from the previous comprehensive inspection in May 2015. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 August 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 Amherst Court
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has slipped, from Outstanding to Good.
- October 2020Goodcurrent ratingdown from OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- August 2018Outstandingstayed OutstandingSafe: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- October 2015OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 May 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
91 live-in carers within about an hour of Medway
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. 78 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
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.