CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Cannock Specialist Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and that risks, medicines, staffing and infection control were managed safely. They noted some points about emergency evacuation guidance, as-required medicine records and the infection control policy.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found systems to monitor care, respond to errors and share learning. The manager was open about incidents and people, relatives and professionals were kept informed when things went wrong.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Cannock Specialist Care Centre was rated Good; inspectors found safe care and good management, with some record-keeping points to improve.
This was an unannounced inspection on 21 June 2023. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicines, accident and safeguarding records, recruitment, training, complaints and quality checks.
The inspection focused on Safe and Well-led because concerns had been raised about risk management and staffing. Inspectors found no evidence that people were being harmed because of those concerns. They found enough staff to meet people's needs, safe medicines processes, suitable safeguarding systems and legal checks where people were deprived of their liberty.
The home had systems to monitor care and learn from mistakes. People and relatives were asked for their views, and staff worked with outside professionals. Inspectors identified some areas for better recording and updating policies, but these did not change the Good ratings.
Both Safe and Well-led were rated Good. The overall Good rating also included ratings from the previous inspection for questions that were not looked at this time.
Safeguarding
People were protected from abuse. Staff had safeguarding training and said they knew how to report concerns.
“People were protected from the risk of abuse.” from the report
Staffing levels
Inspectors found enough staff on duty and saw staff being moved around the home to respond to people's needs.
“There were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were received, stored, given and disposed of safely. Staff involved in medicines had received training.
“Medicines were received, stored, administered, and disposed of safely.” from the report
Learning and improvement
The management team investigated incidents and introduced training, reminders and reflection sessions when recording problems were found.
“There was a culture of continuous learning and improvement.” from the report
Agency staff
minorA staff member said there were too many agency staff, although inspectors found staffing levels were safe and there had been no impact on residents. Management had a plan to recruit more permanent staff.
“Although I think there are too many agency staff and agency staff can be less reliable, we are at safe levels and there has been no impact on residents.” from the report
As-required medicine records
needs fixingInspectors asked the home to record more detail about why as-required medicines were given, so this could be monitored properly.
“We discussed ensuring adequate detail was recorded in people's notes after people took any 'As required' medicine to ensure the reasons for administration could be better monitored.” from the report
Policy and emergency records
minorThe infection prevention policy did not show when it had last been reviewed. Inspectors also asked for more detail in emergency evacuation guidance and fire alarm testing records.
“Although we were not assured that the provider's infection prevention and control policy was up to date due to the date on the last review being missing, the provider had put a plan in place to review it.” from the report
- 01What has changed since the inspection to reduce the use of agency staff and increase permanent staffing?
- 02How do you now record why an as-required medicine was given and check that the records are complete?
- 03Has the infection prevention and control policy been reviewed and dated since the inspection?
- 04How do emergency evacuation plans record people's individual needs, including anyone who may become distressed or refuse to leave?
- 05How are actions after accidents, incidents or safeguarding discussions recorded and checked?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; the other key question ratings were carried over from the previous inspection when calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 July 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, January 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with agency staff needing a better understanding of safeguarding.
This was the home’s first inspection since it registered. The visit was unannounced and took place on 17 January 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and outside professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, training, recruitment, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and good infection control. People were supported by staff who knew them, and their privacy, choices, independence and personal preferences were respected.
The inspection was partly prompted by concerns about staffing and risk management. Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from these concerns. However, some agency staff were not clear about different types of abuse or how to report concerns, so the provider was given a recommendation to improve this.
Risk management
People had detailed risk assessments and clear guidance for staff. The manager reviewed incidents and introduced extra equipment or support when needed.
“People had comprehensive risk assessments in place which explored their known risks and gave staff clear guidance to reduce these risks.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that staff knew people well and respected their dignity, privacy, choices and independence.
“People were supported by kind and caring staff who knew them well. People's dignity and privacy was respected.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people’s preferences, histories and communication needs. People and relatives were involved in planning and reviewing care.
“People had personalised care plans which reflected their preferences.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People had access to group and one-to-one activities, special events and spaces for family occasions. The home supported people to maintain important relationships.
“People had access to a large range of both group and 1 to 1 activities in line with their preferences.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The manager investigated concerns and reviewed accidents and incidents. Action was taken to reduce the chance of problems happening again.
“Accidents and incidents were reviewed by the registered manager to ensure future risks could be reduced.” from the report
Agency staff safeguarding knowledge
needs fixingSome agency staff were not clear about the different types of abuse or how to report concerns. The CQC made a recommendation that all staff should have a comprehensive understanding of safeguarding.
“We recommend the provider ensure all staff have a comprehensive understanding of safeguarding and how to report concerns.” from the report
Staff supervision and appraisal
minorStaff supervisions and appraisals had been planned but had not happened at the time of inspection because the home had newly opened. Inspectors said they would check this at the next inspection.
“As the home had newly opened these had not happened yet. We will check these at our next inspection.” from the report
- 01What training and checks have agency staff received about recognising abuse and reporting safeguarding concerns?
- 02Have staff now received regular supervisions and appraisals, and how are any training needs followed up?
- 03How are staffing levels reviewed when someone’s risk changes, such as after a fall or during periods of distress?
- 04How will you involve my relative and our family in care planning and reviews?
- 05What activities and communication support would be available for my relative’s individual preferences and needs?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering all five CQC areas, including infection prevention and control, and there were no previous ratings to carry over. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 January 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.
Every inspection of Cannock Specialist Care Centre
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Cannock Specialist Care Centre →
- January 2023GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Cannock Specialist Care Centre →
- July 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 July 2022.
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 Staffordshire
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 £1,230 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.