CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Anson Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2023
Anson Court was rated Good overall, with kind and safe care, but well-led Requires Improvement and inspectors raised concerns about falls and incident monitoring.
This was an unannounced inspection. Two inspectors visited on 26 January 2023 and the inspection activity continued until 7 February 2023. They spoke with people living there, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines, recruitment records and management information.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found people were treated kindly, supported with dignity, and given personalised care. Medicines, infection control, staff training, food and activities were also found to be managed well.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. There had been a high number of falls and other incidents, and the review of these was not detailed enough to identify patterns across units and times. The team had worked with outside professionals and had seen a reduction in falls and incidents, but inspectors recommended that staffing levels be adjusted when risks increased.
The overall rating was Good, but this does not mean every area was strong. The home had a lower rating for leadership and needed to improve how it gathers views from people, relatives and staff. Responsive improved from Requires Improvement at the previous rated inspection to Good, while the last inspection published in 2021 was not rated.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff responding calmly and warmly. People were treated with dignity and their choices were respected.
“All observations found staff to be attentive and caring about the people they supported.” from the report
Medicines managed accurately
The sample checked by inspectors matched the prescribers’ instructions, and staff had training and competency checks.
“We reviewed a sample of medicines and found records and quantities to be accurate.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people’s preferences and needs. Staff could explain how they supported individuals and responded to changes.
“The plans were person centred and captured the detail that guided staff.” from the report
Activities and social contact
People were offered group and individual activities, and their decisions not to join in were respected.
“For people cared for mainly in bed, or those who liked to stay in their rooms, an activities organiser visited rooms and offered 1-1 activities.” from the report
Food and drinks
People were offered choices, drinks and snacks. Staff provided suitable support and sought advice when people were losing weight.
“All mealtimes observations were positive.” from the report
Falls and incident monitoring
seriousThe home had a high number of falls and incidents. Managers were not reviewing the information broadly enough to identify patterns between units and times, so inspectors recommended stronger oversight.
“The oversight of accidents and incidents needed to be more overarching.” from the report
Staffing at higher-risk times
seriousInspectors recommended changing staffing levels when people were more unsettled or other factors increased the risk of falls or incidents, such as infection.
“We recommend the management team ensure staffing levels are amended as needed during times when factors may increase incidents between people or when they may become more unsettled causing them to fall.” from the report
End of life plans
needs fixingStaff knew people well, but end of life care plans did not always contain enough detail about individual wishes. The management team was working on this and had started additional training.
“These needed more detail to ensure care plans were accurate and in accordance with people's wishes.” from the report
Listening to views
needs fixingPeople, relatives and staff said they would welcome more opportunities to give feedback. Some staff also felt they were not always listened to in meetings.
“People, relatives and staff felt their views about the service could be sought more often.” from the report
- 01How do you now review falls and other incidents across each unit and at different times of day?
- 02When staffing levels are increased because people are unsettled or there is an infection, how is this decided and recorded?
- 03What changes have been made to ensure end of life care plans clearly record each person’s wishes?
- 04How are people and relatives being given more opportunities to share their views about the home?
- 05What action has been taken following the concerns about night-time staff working to the same standard as day staff?
This was an unannounced inspection that included infection prevention and control and examined risks linked to falls and incidents; it did not examine the circumstances of the death that prompted the inspection, and the inspection activity ran from 26 January to 7 February 2023. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 March 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, February 2021
Anson Court was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about its infection prevention and control arrangements.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 13 January 2021. It focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus outbreak.
Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, arranged testing, managed admissions and isolation, and followed shielding and social distancing rules. They also found that the home had an up-to-date infection control policy and arrangements for managing outbreaks.
The home helped people keep in touch with relatives during lockdown through phone and video calls, letters and online events. Staff were seen engaging well with people and working to reduce the impact of restrictions.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other areas of care.
Keeping families in touch
The home used calls, letters, postcards and online events to help people maintain contact with relatives while visits were stopped during lockdown.
“The staff at the home helped people to keep in touch with their families and friends.” from the report
Reducing infection spread
People were grouped by unit and staff worked on the same units to reduce the risk of infection spreading.
“Staff worked on the same units to reduce the risk of cross infection.” from the report
PPE and infection training
Staff received training in PPE, infection control and COVID-19. They said they felt supported and had enough information to do their jobs.
“Staff received training on donning and doffing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), infection control and COVID-19.” from the report
Safe admissions and isolation
People moving into the home or returning from hospital were required to isolate for a set period. Staff understood the isolation process and the symptoms to look for.
“Staff were clear on what it meant to isolate and what symptoms of COVID-19 to look out for.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people currently supported to keep in touch with their families?
- 02How are people grouped and staff allocated to reduce the risk of cross infection?
- 03What isolation arrangements apply when someone moves into the home or returns from hospital?
- 04How often do staff receive training in PPE and infection control?
- 05What were the home's ratings for care areas that this targeted inspection did not cover?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus outbreak; it did not rate the other key questions or give an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 February 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 Anson Court
2 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- November 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 November 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 Hertfordshire
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. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
“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.