CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Clifton View Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Clifton View Care Home rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care but unsafe medicines processes and weak checks on care plans.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 5 and 6 June 2023. It followed concerns about neglectful care and some incidents reported by the provider. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. They observed care and checked care, medicine, staff and management records.
People were treated kindly and with dignity. They felt safe, there were enough staff, infection control was effective and activities were available. However, care plans did not always give staff clear instructions. Medicines were mostly managed safely, but some records were incomplete and checks were missed.
The service was rated Requires Improvement overall. Safe and well-led were rated Requires Improvement, while caring remained Good. The previous overall rating was Good, published on 22 March 2019. This was a focused inspection, so the other key questions were not inspected and their previous ratings were used when calculating the overall rating.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff respond kindly when people were distressed or confused. People and relatives spoke positively about staff's compassion.
“People, visiting professionals and relatives all spoke highly of the kind culture in the home.” from the report
People's independence
People were involved in decisions about their care and were supported to make choices about where they sat, what they ate and how they spent their time.
“People told us that staff promoted their independence.” from the report
Enough staff
People and relatives said there were enough staff, and inspectors saw staff respond quickly when people needed help.
“People and their relatives told us there were enough staff to support people safely.” from the report
Activities and community links
People had access to varied activities, including visits from community groups and music-related activities. Inspectors saw people enjoying time with staff.
“We saw people dancing, laughing, and singing with staff in communal areas.” from the report
Incomplete care guidance
needs fixingSome care plans gave conflicting or unclear instructions, including guidance about repositioning and the use of a motion sensor. This could make it harder for staff to provide consistent care.
“Care plans did not always have clear guidance on how to care for a person.” from the report
Medicine recording and checking
seriousStaff did not always record why as-needed medicines were given. A second staff member had not always signed handwritten medicine instructions, leaving a risk that errors would not be identified.
“Staff did not always record the reason for giving 'as needed' medicine to a person.” from the report
Unidentified fire risk
seriousTwo people who smoked had highly flammable creams applied to their skin. The manager acted immediately after inspectors raised this, but the home's own checks had not identified the risk.
“Two people had highly flammable creams applied to their skin.” from the report
Weak audits
needs fixingReviews and audits did not consistently identify or correct problems. An earlier medicine audit had identified missing records, but the same problem was still found during the inspection.
“Audits were not always effective at improving care” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to ensure as-needed medicines are recorded with the reason they were given?
- 02How do you now check handwritten medicine instructions and make sure a second staff member signs them?
- 03How have you improved care plans where guidance was unclear or conflicting?
- 04How do you identify and manage risks from flammable creams for people who smoke?
- 05What evidence can you show that your audits now find and correct problems?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Caring and Well-led; Effective and Responsive were not inspected and the previous ratings were used in calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 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, March 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind, person-centred care, with some recording and notification issues.
This was an unannounced inspection on 13 and 14 February 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and visiting health professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management documents.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, clean surroundings, suitable care plans and positive relationships between staff and people.
The home had improved since the previous inspection, which was rated Requires Improvement and published in July 2016. Improvements included medicines, staffing and protecting the rights of people who lacked capacity to make decisions.
Inspectors found two record-keeping issues. Safety checks were not always recorded consistently, and some accidents and near misses had not been notified to the CQC accurately and promptly. These issues were discussed with the home, and immediate or planned improvements were reported.
Staffing and safety
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw that recruitment checks were completed. Staff knew how to protect people from harm.
“There were enough staff on duty to support the needs of people and keep them safe.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines systems had improved since the previous inspection. Staff were trained, their competence was checked, and medicines were observed to be stored, given and recorded safely.
“We observed staff administering people's medicines and saw medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw friendly, caring interactions. Staff asked for consent and supported people's dignity, choices and independence.
“We observed positive, caring and friendly interactions between staff and people.” from the report
Personalised support and activities
Care plans included people's preferences, life histories and spiritual needs. People could take part in activities and access the local community.
“Care Plans were detailed, person centred and gave the reader an understanding of the persons needs both physically and spiritually.” from the report
Leadership and learning
The home had clear management and quality checks. Staff felt able to raise concerns, and incidents were reviewed so lessons could be shared.
“The service had an open and transparent culture.” from the report
Safety check records
needs fixingInspectors found that records of regular safety checks were not always consistent. The registered manager was told, and improvements were made immediately.
“However, we found recording of this was not always consistent.” from the report
Accident notifications
needs fixingSome accidents and near misses had not been reported to the CQC accurately and on time. The home gave assurances that these notifications would be submitted, and inspectors found no evidence of harm from the omissions.
“Notifications were not always made in an accurate and timely manner.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure all safety checks are recorded consistently?
- 02How do you check that accidents and near misses are notified to the CQC accurately and on time?
- 03What evidence can you show that the improvements to medicines management since July 2016 have been maintained?
- 04How are staffing levels checked on each floor and during different shifts?
- 05How do you involve people who lack capacity, and their legally authorised representatives, in best-interest decisions?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering the whole service and all five CQC questions; the report says the premises and the care provided were both looked at. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 March 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 View Care Home
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- July 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodCaring: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 May 2016.
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.