CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Cheviot Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. The home had suitable staffing, risk assessments, safety checks and medicines systems, and staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and preferences were assessed, and staff had the training and support they needed. People were supported with food, drink, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors found kind and respectful staff who supported people's dignity, privacy, independence and involvement in everyday choices.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- The home provided exceptionally person-centred care. Staff used people's life histories, interests, beliefs and preferences to shape activities and support.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found approachable management, good teamwork and an effective quality-checking system. People, relatives, staff and professionals were encouraged to give feedback.
What inspectors found, June 2019
Cheviot Court was rated Good overall, with Outstanding responsiveness and inspectors finding safe, kind and personalised care.
Inspectors visited without warning on 7, 10 and 17 May 2019. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, staff files, audits and other safety records.
The home was rated Good for being safe, effective, caring and well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable training, personalised care plans and good support with food, drink and healthcare.
Responsiveness was rated Outstanding. Staff knew people's histories and interests, supported religious and cultural needs, used technology to maintain family contact and offered a wide range of activities.
The overall Good rating means inspectors found the home met legal requirements and provided a good standard of care. The rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published in November 2016.
Personalised support
Staff knew people's life histories, interests and preferences. They involved people in decisions and created activities around what mattered to them.
“The service was exceptionally person-centred. People's needs were a priority and staff were very motivated to meet these needs.” from the report
Activities and family contact
The home offered varied activities, including music, outings, creative work and dementia-focused activities. Technology was also used to help people keep in touch with family.
“The provider embraced the new technology; this had been incorporated into aspects of the home.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported independence and adjusted their approach to individual communication needs.
“Staff were kind, considerate and caring.” from the report
Safety and staffing
Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines management and suitable checks on risks, accidents and the environment.
“There were enough staff to provide the care people wanted; staff were always visible around the home.” from the report
Listening and improvement
People, relatives and staff had regular chances to give feedback. The home used audits and action plans to address issues.
“The provider operated a structured approach to quality assurance; this was effective in identifying and addressing issues.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you use my relative's life history, hobbies and preferences to plan their activities and daily care?
- 02What activities are available for people with my relative's interests, mobility and communication needs?
- 03How do you check that medicines are given at the right time and that staff continue to follow the agreed procedures?
- 04How would you support my relative to make choices if they have difficulty communicating or lack capacity for a particular decision?
- 05How can relatives raise concerns or give feedback, and how will we be told what action has been taken?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering the care, premises and all five CQC questions, with additional evidence submitted after the visits and considered in the ratings. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 June 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.
What inspectors found, November 2016
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, caring care, but the Responsive rating was Requires Improvement because some care plans lacked important details.
Inspectors visited over two days in August 2016. The first visit was unannounced. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff, observed care, looked around the building, and checked care, medicines, staff and quality records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led were all rated Good. Inspectors found people felt safe, staff were kind and trained, medicines were managed safely, food and drink were well supported, and managers listened to people's views.
Responsive was rated Requires Improvement. Four of the 74 care plans checked lacked important details, and some records conflicted with each other. This meant staff might not have clear, consistent instructions about people's care. The provider had already identified this issue through its own checks and said action had been taken.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe and comfortable. Inspectors found risks were assessed and reviewed, the building was maintained, staffing levels met the home's dependency assessment, and medicines were safely managed.
“Risks to people's health and safety were appropriately assessed, managed and reviewed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people's preferences and supported them at their own pace. Inspectors saw people being treated with dignity and encouraged to make choices.
“We saw staff got down to eye level to reassure and comfort someone who was becoming anxious.” from the report
Good food and health support
People were offered choices and received support with eating and drinking. The home worked with health professionals and used extra monitoring for people at nutritional risk.
“People's nutritional well-being was assessed on admission and on a monthly basis.” from the report
Activities and community links
There was a broad programme including music, games, crafts, reminiscence, outings and visits from people in the local community.
“These included music and singing sessions, games, arts and crafts, reminiscence chats using old newspapers, quizzes and cinema events.” from the report
Strong management checks
The manager was approachable and staff felt valued and informed. The provider carried out regular audits, including checks on care plans.
“The provider had a robust quality assurance system to monitor the safety and quality of the care service provided to the people who lived there.” from the report
Care plans were not always complete
needs fixingFour care plans lacked important information and some contained conflicting instructions. This could lead to inconsistent or unsuitable support, especially when a person's needs changed.
“Four of the 74 people's care plans did not include important information about people's specific care needs and others were contradictory.” from the report
Some safety arrangements needed tightening
needs fixingFire drills were held at the same time each month and did not include night staff. Some bathrooms were being used for storage, creating a possible tripping risk. The manager said these points would be addressed.
“Fire drills were completed each month, but at the same time of day each month with no night staff included in the drill.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that care plans include every person's current needs and do not contain conflicting instructions?
- 02What written guidance is available for staff when a person needs help with mobility, eating, drinking or behaviour that may challenge?
- 03How do you make sure night staff take part in fire drills and can evacuate people safely?
- 04What activities are available at weekends, when activity staff are not working?
- 05How do you record whether a person or relative is satisfied with the outcome of a complaint?
This was a two-day inspection covering all five CQC questions; inspectors reviewed six care records and 14 medicines records, so it was not a check of every person's records. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 November 2016 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 Cheviot Court
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of South Tyneside
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 £1,140 a week. 34 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.