CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Castleview Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines management and systems to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. They noted that additional training was needed to support staff in analysing falls.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care plans were updated when needs changed. Staff were trained and skilled, people received support with food and healthcare, and the principles of the Mental Capacity Act were followed.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as caring and kind. Inspectors saw staff treating people with dignity, supporting independence and involving people in decisions about their care.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care was highly personalised and reflected people's preferences, relationships, interests and beliefs. Inspectors also found excellent use of technology, strong community links, individual activities and exceptional end of life support.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had open and supportive leadership, thorough audits and a strong focus on person-centred care. People, relatives and staff were encouraged to give feedback, and the home worked with outside professionals.
What inspectors found, February 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found exceptionally responsive, kind care, with extra falls-analysis training needed.
This was an unannounced inspection by two inspectors on 4 and 13 December 2018. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and visiting health professionals. They observed care and reviewed care, staff and safety records.
The home was rated Good overall. It was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. Responsive care was rated Outstanding. Inspectors found personalised care, strong community links, kind staff and exceptional support at the end of people's lives.
The home was undergoing building work to improve communal areas and the garden. Inspectors also said more training was needed to help staff analyse falls, although the manager said this would be provided.
Personalised care
Care plans reflected what mattered to each person, including their social, cultural, spiritual and health needs. People and relevant others were involved in planning care.
“Without question people received personalised care and support specific to their needs and preferences.” from the report
End of life care
Inspectors found comprehensive plans, links with a local hospice and thoughtful support for relatives after someone died.
“People received exceptional end of life care and staff worked to support the person and their relatives.” from the report
Community links
The home invited local people and faith groups to events. It also offered activities and support that helped people remain connected with others.
“The home took a key role in actively engaging with the local community and considered further ways that links could be established.” from the report
Supportive leadership
Inspectors found a visible and approachable manager, a positive staff culture and thorough quality checks.
“Responsibility and accountability was demonstrated through the use of audits which were thorough and questioning.” from the report
Falls analysis training
needs fixingInspectors identified that staff needed further training to analyse falls properly. The manager said this training would be provided.
“It was highlighted that additional training was required to support staff in the analysis of falls.” from the report
Some food dissatisfaction
minorMost people enjoyed the food, but one person wanted more salad and another did not like the food. The manager said alternative choices were available.
“One person told us they would like more salad and another said they did not like the food.” from the report
- 01What additional training has staff received to analyse falls, and what changes have been made as a result?
- 02How has the building work affected residents, and has the new conservatory, lounge, garden and seating area been completed?
- 03How are individual food preferences recorded, and what alternatives are offered when someone does not like the planned meal?
- 04How would you involve me and my relative in care planning if their needs changed?
- 05What end of life support and emotional support would be available to my relative and our family?
This was a planned, unannounced first inspection under the provider's new registration and assessed all five areas, including the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 February 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 Castleview Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- February 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- December 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 December 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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Northumberland
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 £1,190 a week. 20 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.