CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Clifton Manor Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were managed, including use of PPE, testing, cleaning, safe admissions and visiting arrangements. The provider also said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, January 2022
Clifton Manor Nursing Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and visiting arrangements.
Inspectors made an unannounced, targeted visit on 13 January 2022. They looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and the effect of COVID-19 staffing pressures.
They found the home followed guidance on visitors, face coverings, testing, vaccination checks and personal protective equipment. They were also assured that people were admitted safely, the home was clean, and staff had infection control training.
The service was marked “Inspected but not rated”. This was not a full inspection of the home’s overall quality. The report does not give ratings for caring, effective, responsive or well-led care.
Infection control
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic, with uncluttered areas that allowed effective cleaning. Staff were observed using the correct protective equipment.
“The home looked clean and hygienic. All areas of the home were uncluttered so cleaning could take place effectively.” from the report
Safe visiting
Visitors were supported to follow infection control measures, including face coverings, handwashing and testing. Visits were facilitated in a risk-managed way.
“The provider followed the government guidelines to protect visitors from catching and spreading infection.” from the report
Safe admissions and testing
People were tested before admission and supported to isolate in their rooms for 14 days. People and staff had access to COVID-19 testing.
“People were admitted into the service safely. The provider ensured people had been tested for COVID-19 before admitting them” from the report
Staff training and policy
The report says all staff completed infection prevention training and that the home had an up-to-date infection prevention and control policy.
“All staff completed infection prevention control training. The provider had an infection prevention and control policy in place” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What is the home's latest full CQC rating, since this inspection was not rated?
- 02How are staffing pressures being managed now, and have they affected people living at the home?
- 03What infection control and visiting arrangements are currently in place?
- 04How are new residents tested and supported during their first days after admission?
- 05When was the infection prevention and control policy last reviewed?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other key questions or the service overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 January 2022 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 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a staff recruitment audit and activity worker vacancy being addressed.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 29 October 2019. One inspector spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed daily care, checked the building and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe, were treated kindly and were happy with the support. Inspectors saw staff respond promptly and found medicines, risk assessments and healthcare arrangements were managed safely.
Inspectors found that staff understood people's needs and preferences. People received choices about food and care, and staff supported their dignity, independence, communication and relationships.
There were two areas to keep an eye on. Two of the three recruitment files checked had unexplained periods before first employment, so the provider was auditing all files. Activities were limited while the home recruited to a vacant activity worker post.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw staff respond promptly when people needed support or reassurance.
“During this inspection, we saw staff were available to meet people's needs in a timely manner.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People said staff were kind, caring and respectful. Staff knew people's personalities, preferences and individual needs.
“People told us they felt safe and they were consistently treated with kindness, dignity and respect.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were obtained, stored, given and recorded safely. Inspectors found people received medicines as prescribed.
“People were receiving their medicines as prescribed by their GP, and staff kept accurate records about what medicines they had administered to people and when.” from the report
Active management
The management team carried out monthly checks and acted when they found issues. Staff said the manager was supportive and approachable.
“The manager and senior staff monitored the quality of the service and acted when issues were identified.” from the report
Recruitment records
needs fixingTwo of the three recruitment files checked had periods before first employment that were not explained. The manager obtained statements and said a full audit of staff files would be completed.
“Whilst none held gaps in the employment listed, two files had some years between leaving education and commencing first employment.” from the report
Activities provision
minorSome activities were provided by care workers, but the home had a vacant activity worker post. The report says filling this post would improve leisure opportunities.
“At the time of this inspection the home was recruiting to a vacant activity worker post.” from the report
- 01Has the full audit of staff recruitment files been completed, and were any other unexplained employment gaps found?
- 02Has the vacant activity worker post been filled, and what activities are now available?
- 03How are my relative's risk assessments reviewed when their needs change?
- 04How will my relative and family be involved in care plan reviews and decisions?
- 05How does the home monitor medicines given as and when required?
This inspection covered all five CQC questions and looked at people's experiences, care and medicines records, staffing, the building and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 November 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 Clifton Manor Nursing Home
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 January 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
90 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottingham
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 £1,270 a week. 73 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.