CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Bosworth Court Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm, and staff understood how to recognise and report abuse. Medicines, risk assessments and infection control were found to be managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People’s needs and choices were assessed and reviewed. Inspectors found improvements in oral care, good support with food and drink, and appropriate access to healthcare.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home was described as consistently managed and well-led. Staff and relatives said they could raise concerns, and audits and improvements were being carried out.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, effective and well-led care, but end-of-life forms needed more regular checks.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 16 December 2020. One inspector spoke with people, staff and relatives, observed care, and checked care records, medicines, infection control and management records.
Inspectors found people were safe and that infection control measures were in place. Medicines were stored and given safely. People’s needs, food, healthcare and oral care were supported, and staff worked well with other services.
The home was rated Good overall, with Safe, Effective and Well-led also rated Good. This was an improvement from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection. The overall rating included earlier ratings for Caring and Responsive, which were not inspected this time.
Infection control
Inspectors found arrangements to reduce the risk of infection when people entered the building and during admissions. Staff used protective equipment appropriately, and testing was carried out.
“Staff were seen to be wearing appropriate PPE at all times.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored and given in line with prescriptions. People who needed medicines at particular times received them as prescribed.
“Medicines were seen to be stored and administered safely and in accordance with their prescribed regimes.” from the report
Improved oral care
Concerns from the previous inspection about oral care had been addressed. Oral care was included in electronic care plans and staff had received training.
“Oral care assessments and plans were now incorporated into people's electronic care plans and were an integral part of assessment and daily care.” from the report
Positive relationships
People and relatives gave positive feedback about the care and communication. Relatives said they felt informed, including during lockdown periods.
“Relatives were very positive about the care and experiences people were getting, and felt well informed, even during the periods of lockdown.” from the report
Supportive leadership
Staff said management support and training had improved. Inspectors found that staff felt respected, valued and able to raise concerns.
“Managers and the management team were available, consistent, and lead by example.” from the report
End-of-life forms needed routine review
needs fixingInspectors found that forms about resuscitation and emergency treatment had not been routinely reviewed after admission for seven residents. The home was asked to create a process to make sure the information stayed accurate and reflected people’s wishes.
“Recent concerns over the quality of DNAR or CPR forms in the case of seven residents found that no review of these had taken place within the home, on a routine basis, after people had been admitted with one in place.” from the report
Dental access remained difficult
minorThe home was still struggling to find a visiting dental team, although inspectors said it had been able to arrange appropriate dental care when needed.
“The home was still struggling to find a peripatetic dental team but had been able to access appropriate dental care when required.” from the report
- 01What process is now used to review DNACPR and ReSPECT forms after someone moves into the home?
- 02How do you check that end-of-life care records remain accurate and reflect the person’s current wishes?
- 03How do you arrange dental care while you are still struggling to find a visiting dental team?
- 04What were the specific improvements made to oral care since the previous inspection?
- 05How will you make sure relatives remain informed and involved when visiting restrictions are in place?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected, and the overall rating also used ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 January 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.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, kind care, but oral healthcare, dementia-friendly surroundings and management systems needed strengthening.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 18 September 2019. One inspector and one Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, toured the home and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Caring and Responsive. People were protected from avoidable harm, medicines were managed safely, staff were kind and respectful, and care was generally personalised. People were also supported with food, drink, healthcare and end of life care.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Effective and Well-led. Oral health assessments and care plans were missing, and the building did not have enough clear signs for people living with dementia. People and relatives were not regularly involved in meetings or surveys about how the home was run.
The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection, published on 31 January 2017. The report says a new acting manager had started improvements, but quality checks and staff supervision needed time to become established.
Safe care and staffing
People were protected from avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment checks, safe medicines systems and suitable infection control.
“People received safe care and were protected against avoidable harm, neglect and discrimination.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people well and provided gentle, compassionate support. Inspectors saw staff protect people's dignity and encourage independence.
“Staff provided care and support in a very caring and meaningful way.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, backgrounds, interests and relationships. People were supported to make choices and maintain contact with those important to them.
“Care plans were personalised and contained information about people's likes and dislikes.” from the report
End of life care
The home had information about people's end of life wishes and staff training. Inspectors found a detailed plan for a person receiving palliative care.
“The provider had policies and procedures in place to meet people's wishes for end of life care” from the report
Oral healthcare
needs fixingThe home did not complete oral health assessments on admission or during people's stay. There were also no specific oral health care plans, and inspectors made a recommendation for improvement.
“There were no plans of care for people's oral health care needs and oral health assessments were not completed on admission or throughout peoples' stay at the service.” from the report
Dementia-friendly surroundings
needs fixingSome rooms had no numbers or only small numbers, and toilets, bathrooms and communal areas were not clearly signed. This could make it harder for some people to find their way independently.
“The environment had not been sufficiently adapted to help meet the needs of people living with dementia.” from the report
Management and feedback systems
needs fixingPeople and relatives had not been invited to regular meetings, and satisfaction surveys had not been sent regularly. Quality checks and staff supervision had only recently been introduced and were not yet embedded.
“Quality monitoring checks had been introduced but needed time to become embedded in practice to ensure they were effective.” from the report
Activity choice
minorSome people said they wanted more variety in the activities available, including craft activities.
“Some people told us they would like to see more activities on offer.” from the report
- 01What oral health assessment and care plan is now completed for each person, and how are dental appointments arranged?
- 02What clear signs or other changes have been made to help people living with dementia find their rooms, toilets and communal areas?
- 03How often are meetings and satisfaction surveys now held for people and relatives, and what changes have followed from their feedback?
- 04How are quality audits checked to make sure identified actions are completed and improvements last?
- 05What is the current range of activities, and how are people's requests for more variety being addressed?
This was an unannounced planned comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, the premises and the care provided; Safe, Caring and Responsive remained Good, while Effective and Well-led fell to Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 October 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 Bosworth Court Care Home
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2021Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 February 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leicestershire
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 £1,260 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“Together Earther and I supported her to die at home with great dignity and compassion and him to continue with life.”
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.