Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a nursing home

What the CQC found at Clare Hall Nursing Home

Goodpublished 12 November 2024, 22 months ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, June 2023

Clare Hall Nursing Home was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found caring staff but important care records and monitoring were not always reliable.

Inspectors visited the home without notice on 25 and 27 April 2023. They spoke with 12 people, 12 relatives and 8 staff. They reviewed care, medicine and staff records, audits, training information and health and safety checks.

The home was rated Requires Improvement overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were each rated Requires Improvement. The rating means some parts of care were not consistently safe, effective or well managed, and there was limited assurance about safety.

Inspectors found that staff knew people well and treated them positively. Medicines were generally stored and given safely, staffing and recruitment were considered sufficient, and the home was clean. However, records about care needs, fluids, wounds, medicines and risk were not always complete or kept up to date.

There had been new managers and new monitoring systems since the previous Good rating in August 2021. The systems were not yet fully effective. Managers accepted the feedback and took action during and after the inspection.

What inspectors praised
  • Staff knew people well

    Inspectors saw positive interactions between staff and people. Staff understood how to support the people living in the home.

    “However, staff knew people well and knew how to support people. During the inspection we observed positive interactions between staff and people.” from the report
  • Safe recruitment and staffing

    Inspectors found safe recruitment checks and enough staff on duty during the visit. Staff did not appear rushed and were available when people needed them.

    “There was enough staff on duty to meet people's needs. Staff did not appear rushed and were available when people needed them.” from the report
  • Medicines storage and checks

    Medicines were stored safely, storage temperatures were checked and stock balances were monitored. Staff giving medicines had training and competency checks.

    “Medicines were stored safely, and ongoing stock balance checks were carried out. Temperature of storage areas were monitored.” from the report
  • Clean environment

    The home was visibly clean, with cleaning schedules and enough protective equipment. The laundry arrangements kept dirty and clean linen separate.

    “The environment was visibly clean. A relative told us it was, "Spotlessly clean.” from the report
  • Improved staff support

    Staff said communication and the atmosphere had improved under the new management. The home had introduced more training, supervision and checks of staff practice.

    “Staff spoke highly of the management changes.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Fluid monitoring and recording

    serious

    Records did not always show whether people had enough to drink or whether concerns had been escalated. This was especially important for someone identified as at risk of dehydration and malnutrition.

    “There was nothing recorded to indicate if staff had noted the poor fluid intake or if this had been escalated to the nurse in charge.” from the report
  • Care plans were not always current

    needs fixing

    One person's moving and handling needs had changed, but the care plan and handover sheet had not been updated. Some other care plans did not give enough detailed, person-centred guidance.

    “However, the care plan had not been updated to reflect this. The handover sheet we were provided with had also not been updated.” from the report
  • Wound care records

    needs fixing

    Wound photographs did not always include measuring tools. This made it harder for nurses to tell whether wounds were improving or getting worse.

    “This meant it would be difficult for nurses to easily assess if wounds were improving or deteriorating.” from the report
  • Medicine application records

    needs fixing

    Records did not consistently show that creams and lotions had been applied. Patch application sites were also not always rotated as required.

    “Although some people's records showed this took place, it was inconsistent.” from the report
  • New systems not fully embedded

    needs fixing

    The new electronic records and quality checks were still being introduced. Audits did not always find or resolve ongoing problems with recording important information.

    “However, these checks did not always identify and address where there continued to be concerns with the recording and communicating of important information about people's needs.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How do you now check that people at risk of dehydration have their fluids recorded accurately and that poor intake is escalated?
  2. 02How do you make sure care plans and handover records are updated promptly when a person's needs change?
  3. 03What checks now confirm that wound photographs include measurements and show whether wounds are improving?
  4. 04How do you check that topical medicines are recorded as given and that medicine patches are applied to rotated sites?
  5. 05How many agency staff are currently used, and how do you ensure they complete the new induction and understand each person's care plan?

The inspection assessed Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not given ratings in this report, and the previous overall rating was Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 June 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.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, August 2021

Clare Hall Nursing Home rated Good; inspectors found people were safe and well supported, but staffing levels sometimes fell below the required minimum.

This was an unannounced inspection on 20 July 2021. Inspectors spoke with four people living at the home, six relatives and eight staff. They also reviewed care, medicines, staffing, recruitment, training, incident and management records.

The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. Inspectors found people appeared relaxed and happy with staff, relatives were positive about the care, medicines were managed safely, and the home was clean. Staff understood safeguarding and risks to people were assessed and reviewed.

The inspection was prompted by concerns about staffing during the pandemic. Staffing sometimes fell below the home's required level, although the registered manager and deputy manager provided care and nursing cover when needed. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used for the overall rating.

What inspectors praised
  • Safeguarding

    Staff had safeguarding training and knew how to report concerns. The provider investigated concerns and took action to help prevent them happening again.

    “The provider had systems in place to protect people from the risk of abuse.” from the report
  • Clean and well maintained

    The home was clean and fresh. Equipment and the environment were checked regularly, and identified problems were put right.

    “The home was clean and smelt fresh throughout.” from the report
  • Safe medicines

    Medicines were stored securely, temperatures were checked and stock was monitored. Staff gave medicines requiring time between doses at the correct times.

    “Medicines were managed safely.” from the report
  • Strong management checks

    The management team used regular audits covering care records, nutrition, infections, pressure ulcers, call bells and infection control. Shortfalls found through audits were addressed.

    “Since our last inspection the service had improved their governance system.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Staffing levels

    needs fixing

    Staffing levels had fluctuated during the pandemic and were sometimes below the home's required minimum. The registered manager and deputy manager provided care and nursing cover in those situations.

    “The registered manager confirmed that on occasion the service had been unable to meet required levels of staffing.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How often are staffing levels below the required minimum now, and what happens when this occurs?
  2. 02How often are agency staff used, and how does the home check their experience and knowledge of residents?
  3. 03How often do the registered manager or deputy manager provide direct care instead of managing the home?
  4. 04What recent changes have resulted from the home's audits of care records, call bell response times and infection control?
  5. 05How will the home keep families informed about changes in their relative's care?

This was a focused inspection prompted by staffing concerns and covered Safe and Well-led; the other three ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 August 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Clare Hall Nursing Home

5 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.

  1. June 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from Good
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read what inspectors found at Clare Hall Nursing Home →

  2. August 2021Good
    Safe: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Clare Hall Nursing Home →

  3. March 2021Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. September 2017Goodup from Requires improvement
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. August 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. March 2015Requires improvement
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. May 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  8. September 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  9. October 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  10. May 2012

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 May 2012.

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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

76 live-in carers within about two hours of Somerset

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 £1,020 to £1,370 a week. 62 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.

“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
Holly C., about Dace L.
“She was not phased by anything, she was adaptable, kind & gave us complete confidence to go away & not worry about a thing!”
Karen C., about Mandy E.
See live-in carers near SomersetProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.