CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Craigarran Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were supported safely. Staff understood safeguarding and people's risks, medicines records were generally accurate, and staffing and equipment checks were in place. Protocols for medicines given when needed needed improvement.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Requires improvement
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Audits had not identified several problems. Care and risk information was not always easy for staff to locate or access, and some staff felt the registered manager was not sufficiently present or supportive.
What inspectors found, April 2023
Craigarran Care Home was rated Requires Improvement; care was found to be safe, but leadership and care records were not always reliable.
Inspectors visited the home unannounced on 21, 22 and 24 February 2023. They spoke with people living there, relatives and staff, and reviewed care, medicine, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe. Staff understood people's risks, safeguarding procedures were in place, medicines were generally administered safely and staffing levels were sufficient. Inspectors recommended improving protocols for medicines given when needed.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall because its management systems did not reliably identify and fix problems. Care records and risk information were not always easy to find or up to date, and staff did not always feel supported by the registered manager. This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, so the other areas were not examined during this visit.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff had safeguarding training and knew how to report concerns.
“People told us they felt safe at the home.” from the report
Safe medicine handling
Medicine administration records were up to date, stocks were monitored and medicines were stored safely. Controlled medicines records were also completed as required.
“Medicines administration records (MARs) were up to date and accurate.” from the report
Staff knew people’s risks
Staff understood people's risks, including choking, falls and skin damage. Equipment such as pressure mattresses and hoists was checked regularly.
“Staff knew people well and understood their risks and how to manage them safely.” from the report
Warm atmosphere
People and relatives described a caring and relaxed environment. Inspectors saw people appearing relaxed and happy with staff.
“Relatives spoken with described a caring, relaxed environment.” from the report
Weak management oversight
seriousThe home's audits did not identify several problems found by inspectors. This led to a breach of the good governance regulation.
“The provider and registered manager had failed to have effective oversight of the quality assurance systems.” from the report
Care records were difficult to use
needs fixingCare plans and risk assessments were not always easy to find. Electronic updates were not always approved promptly, creating a risk that staff would miss changes.
“People's care records and risk assessments were not always easily found for staff to review.” from the report
Medicine protocols needed improvement
needs fixingInstructions for medicines given when needed did not always contain enough information to guide staff safely. Inspectors made a recommendation for improvement.
“Protocols for PRN medicines (as required medicines) were not always robust enough.” from the report
Staff support and leadership
needs fixingSome staff said they did not always feel supported by the registered manager and wanted the manager to be more present in the home.
“Staff felt the registered manager needed to be more supportive and present within the care home.” from the report
- 01How do staff now find the current care plan, risk assessments and capacity assessments for each resident?
- 02What has been changed so electronic care-plan updates are approved and shared promptly?
- 03What information is now included in protocols for medicines given when needed?
- 04What actions are being taken to improve the registered manager's presence and support for staff?
- 05What progress has been made on the action plan for the Regulation 17 breach?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other key-question ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection published in February 2020. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 April 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, January 2021
Craigarran Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found infection control arrangements that gave them assurance.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 17 December 2020. It checked infection prevention and control arrangements during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that visitors were screened, social distancing was supported and staff used protective equipment. They also found training, testing and arrangements for safe admissions.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide an overall quality rating or a full assessment of all five areas of care.
Visitor safety
Visitors were screened before entering, and arrangements were being made for family visits in a separate room designed to reduce infection spread.
“systems were in place to allow safe visiting. This included screening visitors to reduce any potential infection risk, before they entered the building.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff used protective equipment and had received training in infection prevention and its correct use.
“Staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE). Training in infection prevention and control measures and the appropriate use of PPE had taken place.” from the report
Regular testing
The home had a regular Covid-19 testing programme for people living there and for staff.
“A regular programme of Covid-19 testing was in place for people living at the home and the staff team.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Are visitors still screened before entering, and what infection control steps are now used?
- 02Is the separate visiting room with its own entrance and Perspex screen still available?
- 03How often are people living here and staff tested for Covid-19 or other infections?
- 04What training do staff currently receive in infection prevention and the safe use of protective equipment?
- 05What was the home's most recent full inspection rating for caring, effectiveness, responsiveness and leadership?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not assess the other areas of care or give an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 January 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.
Every inspection of Craigarran Care Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- April 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2017Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 February 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
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
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 £960 to £1,210 a week. 42 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.