CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Belle Vue Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control and visiting arrangements.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 1 February 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether staffing pressures were affecting care.
The inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks. They found effective use of personal protective equipment, regular COVID-19 testing, updated infection control policies and measures to manage visitors and admissions safely.
People were supported to visit relatives and use the local community. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most areas of care.
Infection risk checks
The home had a monitoring system to check that government guidance and its own infection control policies were being followed.
“The registered manager had an effective monitoring system in place to check that the service was following government guidance and the provider's own policies.” from the report
Testing and protective equipment
People, staff and emergency care givers received regular COVID-19 testing. Staff had appropriate PPE and extra training in how to use it.
“Staff wore appropriate PPE and had access to this throughout the home.” from the report
Visiting and community access
Relatives could visit people in their rooms or communal areas. People were also supported to leave the home to visit relatives or use the local community.
“People were encouraged and supported to leave the service to visit relatives or access the local community.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently tested and checked before entering the home?
- 02How do you currently manage infection risks when people leave the home to visit relatives or access the local community?
- 03What staffing pressures are there now, and what effect do they have on people's care?
- 04How do you make sure staff and visiting professionals follow the home's current infection prevention and control policy?
- 05What full CQC ratings does the home currently have for Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led?
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and most areas of care were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 March 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 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care and clear improvements, but some fire safety and decision-making work remained.
The inspection took place over 30 and 31 July 2018. The first day was unannounced and the second day was announced. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care, checked records, medicines, staffing, training, recruitment and the building.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, kind relationships and care records that had been updated. People were supported with food, drinks, health appointments and activities.
The home had improved since the July 2017 inspection, when four areas were rated Requires Improvement. Audits, accident investigations, care planning and complaints monitoring had been strengthened. Inspectors recommended further review of mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions, particularly for locked bedroom doors. Fire safety work was also still ongoing.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw compassionate relationships and staff responding sensitively when someone became upset. People and relatives were consistently positive about the care.
“We observed staff showing kindness, compassion and respect to people.” from the report
Improvement since the last inspection
The home had acted on the previous inspection findings. Care records, audits, accident reviews and action plans were more organised and effective.
“It was evident that lessons had been learnt since the last inspection.” from the report
Safe medicines management
Medicines were given in a timely way. Records had no gaps, and audits had helped improve the recording of refusals and as-required medicines.
“Medicine administration records (MARs) were completed appropriately with no gaps.” from the report
Activities and personal interests
The home provided group and individual activities, including tai chi, exercises, music, hairdressing and sensory activities. Staff used information about people's lives and preferences to plan activities.
“People were supported to engage in a range of activities.” from the report
Mental capacity decisions
needs fixingSome work remained to make sure decisions about restrictions were properly assessed and recorded. This included agreements for locking people's bedroom doors.
“We recommend a further review of guidance relating to the mental capacity act and best interest decisions.” from the report
Fire evacuation arrangements
seriousFire doors and evacuation arrangements were still being reviewed after a fire service visit. The report noted that an evacuation chair was not available and an evacuation mat was to be used instead.
“We noted there was no evacuation chair but instead an evacuation mat was to be used.” from the report
Risk review records
needs fixingRisk assessments were signed as reviewed each month, but the records did not explain how staff had decided that the risks were still relevant.
“There was no content recorded so we were unable to see how it had been assessed that the risk assessment remained relevant.” from the report
Nursing competency checks
needs fixingNurses said they felt well trained, but competency checks were not always completed for some clinical skills. The home said these would be arranged if a person's needs required them.
“Nurses commented that they felt well trained however competency assessments were not always completed.” from the report
- 01Have all the fire doors and evacuation arrangements identified after the fire service visit now been completed?
- 02How do you record mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions for locked bedroom doors and other restrictions?
- 03When are nurses' clinical competencies assessed, and how do you make sure this is done before a person needs that skill?
- 04How do monthly risk assessment reviews show that each person's risks remain relevant and properly managed?
- 05How will you make sure my relative receives activities suited to their interests, abilities and preference for group or one-to-one support?
This was an inspection of the overall quality of the home and covered all five CQC questions, including the building and care provided; it followed up concerns rated Requires Improvement at the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 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 Belle Vue Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 August 2013.
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
36 live-in carers within about an hour of Newcastle upon Tyne
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 £1,160 a week. 30 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.