CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Armstrong House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were managed through testing, vaccination, PPE, hygiene, social distancing and checks on visitors. The provider also described measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- 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, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found infection controls and visiting arrangements were in place during the COVID-19 review.
Inspectors visited the home unannounced on 8 February 2022. This was a targeted inspection focused on infection prevention and control, and on whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected people.
They were assured that the home used testing, vaccination, personal protective equipment, hygiene measures and social distancing to reduce infection risks. They were also assured that visits and admissions were managed safely.
The home was inspected but not rated. This was not a full assessment of all five areas of care, so the report does not give an overall quality rating.
Infection prevention
The home had systems to reduce the spread of infection among people, staff and visitors. Testing and a COVID-19 vaccination programme were in place.
“Systems were in place to help prevent people, staff and visitors from catching and spreading infection.” from the report
Safe visiting
Visitors had checks in place, and the home was facilitating visits in line with the guidance described in the report.
“The provider was facilitating visits for people living in the home in accordance with the current guidance.” from the report
COVID-19 precautions
Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, supported testing and managed the premises to promote infection safety.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
People's well-being
The report says staff worked to maintain people's well-being during the inspection period.
“Staff worked hard to ensure people's well-being was maintained.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What measures are currently in place to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures?
- 02How do you make sure staff use personal protective equipment effectively and safely?
- 03How are people, staff and visitors tested for COVID-19?
- 04How do you manage visits when infection risks or outbreaks occur?
- 05How do you keep the infection prevention and control policy up to date?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 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, August 2019
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding caring; inspectors found kind, personalised support and good safety, but the care record format did not fully capture communication needs.
This was an unannounced inspection carried out over three visits in June and July 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. It was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led, and Outstanding for Caring. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, suitable training and good links with health professionals.
Inspectors were especially positive about how staff treated people as individuals. Staff supported people to make choices, build confidence and regain skills. The home had improved from Good to Outstanding for Caring since the previous inspection.
There were some smaller areas to keep under review. The home found that its care record format did not make it easy to record communication needs, and staff had difficulty managing the temperature in the building. No breaches of regulations or enforcement action were reported.
Exceptionally caring staff
Staff showed strong commitment to people's dignity, choices and wellbeing. They supported people to develop skills and become more independent.
“Staff were exceptionally caring. They focused fully on the goals and aspirations of the people who used the service.” from the report
Good staffing and training
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff received a broad range of training, regular supervision and checks of their competence.
“There were always enough staff on duty to meet people's needs.” from the report
Personalised activities
The home offered activities based on people's interests and helped people take part in community life. Staff also supported people to maintain relationships and regain skills.
“The activity coordinators organised a wide range of entertainment and different projects for people to join.” from the report
Strong leadership and improvement
Managers carried out regular checks, listened to feedback and looked for ways to improve the service. Inspectors found a clear focus on person-centred care.
“The provider, registered manager and deputy manager provided very strong leadership and their constant critical review of the service had led to year-on-year improvements.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are my relative's communication needs recorded and shared with all staff?
- 02What changes have been made to the care record format since the inspection?
- 03How do you manage room temperatures, especially during very hot or cold weather?
- 04How will you support my relative to maintain independence and take part in activities they enjoy?
- 05How are care plans and people's changing health needs reviewed with families and healthcare professionals?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the Caring rating improving from Good to Outstanding since the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 August 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 Armstrong House
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 October 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
48 live-in carers within about an hour of Gateshead
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 £950 to £1,240 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.