CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Crossways Nursing Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, safe visiting arrangements and a clean, well-maintained home.
This was a targeted inspection on 24 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected people.
Inspectors found systems for safe visits, including screening questions, temperature checks and lateral flow test checks. Staff had infection control and protective equipment training, and staff supplies were reported to be sufficient.
The home was clean, tidy and well maintained. Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, testing, protective equipment, safe admissions and managing possible outbreaks.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or a rated judgement for the wider areas of care.
Safe visiting
The home had checks and designated areas to help make visits safer. People and relatives were happy with the visiting arrangements.
“There were systems in place to support safe visiting such as screening questions, temperature checks and checks on lateral flow tests” from the report
Staff infection control
Staff had training in infection control and using protective equipment. Their competence was checked and they said supplies were plentiful.
“Staff had received training in infection prevention and control (IPC) as well as how to safely put on and remove Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean, tidy and well maintained. Audits were used to check standards and whether guidance was being followed.
“The service was clean and tidy and well maintained.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection control and visiting arrangements are in place now?
- 02How do you check that staff use protective equipment correctly?
- 03How do you manage visits when there is an infection outbreak?
- 04How do you manage staffing pressures linked to COVID-19 or other infections?
- 05When was the home's latest full inspection, and what were its ratings for caring, effective, responsive and well-led care?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 March 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, June 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, kind nursing care but gaps in personalised support, dining and oversight.
This was a planned, unannounced inspection on 22 May 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff. They observed care and checked care records, recruitment files, medicines and building safety checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Caring. People had good risk assessments, received medicines as prescribed, and staff were described as kind. People’s physical health was supported well, including referrals to health professionals when needed.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Effective, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that some people did not get enough choice or support with meals, social contact, activities or time outside their rooms. The home’s checks had not identified these problems.
The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection. The home had to send an action plan, and CQC said it would return to check improvements.
Good risk management
People had detailed assessments covering risks such as mobility, malnutrition, choking and skin damage. Fire safety and building checks were also completed.
“People had good risk assessments in place. These explored the risks which people faced in detail.” from the report
Physical health support
People received nursing care and timely referrals when they became unwell or needed specialist help. Relatives reported improvements in some people’s physical health.
“People received a good standard of nursing care at the home.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff treating people kindly and found that staff understood privacy and dignity.
“People spoke positively about the staff who supported them.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff said they felt supported. Training was up to date, and competency checks were used to test staff skills.
“Staff and nurses had regular competency checks to test their abilities to complete their work.” from the report
Meal support was inconsistent
needs fixingSome people eating in their rooms were not encouraged to eat or offered alternatives when they had not eaten. Inspectors also found that choice was not always supported for people living with dementia.
“When they returned, and the person had not eaten their food, this member of staff did not ask why or offer an alternative meal or any assistance.” from the report
Limited social contact
needs fixingSome people spent all their time in bedrooms or in bed with little stimulation. Staff did not consistently talk with people, offer activities or support them to go outside.
“Some people spent all their time in their rooms, with limited stimulation.” from the report
Care was not always personalised
seriousStaff did not always communicate in a personal way or check people were comfortable after providing care. This was a breach of Regulation 9.
“The lack of personalised care meant that this was a breach of Regulation 9 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.” from the report
Quality checks missed problems
seriousThe home’s monitoring systems did not identify shortfalls in people’s daily experiences and staff engagement. This was a breach of Regulation 17.
“The lack of effective quality monitoring systems meant that shortfalls in people's care had not been identified and action had not been taken to address this.” from the report
Tired environment
minorParts of the home and some bedrooms looked tired. A renovation plan was in place, but the work was still being completed.
“The home looked tired in parts and in people's rooms.” from the report
- 01What has changed to make sure people who stay in their rooms receive regular conversation, activities and support to go outside?
- 02How do you now check that people living with dementia are offered meaningful choices about meals and drinks?
- 03How do staff check whether someone has eaten, and what do they do if the person refuses or leaves a meal?
- 04How are people’s interests, past experiences and preferred activities recorded and used in their daily care?
- 05What action was completed after the inspection, and how do your current audits show that the improvements are working?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering the home’s safety, effectiveness, caring, responsiveness and leadership, including the premises and care provided. 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.
Every inspection of Crossways Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 December 2010.
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
88 live-in carers within about an hour of Bedford
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 £1,260 a week. 76 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
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.