CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Eastwood House
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found staffing shortfalls and staff exhaustion, although no evidence showed people were harmed.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 21 April 2022. It was prompted by concerns about staffing. One inspector spoke with people, staff and the manager, reviewed rotas and contacted relatives and care professionals.
There were not always enough staff. Rotas showed shortfalls, and staff described being exhausted while covering gaps. People sometimes had to wait for support, and two visiting professionals had to wait for assistance. Inspectors found no evidence that people had been harmed because of this concern.
The home was clean and infection control arrangements were in place. Staff recruitment checks were completed. The inspection only looked at specific parts of Safe, so the service was inspected but not rated. Its previous overall rating was Requires Improvement, published on 6 December 2021.
Clean and hygienic home
The premises were clean, and inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were in place.
“The premises were clean and staff followed infection control principles and government guidelines.” from the report
Respect for choice
The report says staff supported people to have choice and control and used the least restrictive approach in their best interests.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests;” from the report
Safe recruitment checks
Inspectors found that staff recruitment included checks about whether people were suitable to work at the home.
“Staff were recruited safely and checks were made to ensure they were of good character to work with the people living at the home” from the report
Not enough staff
seriousRotas showed staffing shortfalls and short-notice absences were difficult to cover. Staff exhaustion was identified as a risk to people's safety.
“There was not always enough staff to keep people safe.” from the report
Delays and missed activities
needs fixingPeople sometimes had to wait for support, and visiting professionals had to wait for staff assistance. One person's preferred shopping activity had stopped because staff did not have time.
“This meant people had to wait for their treatment.” from the report
- 01How many staff are scheduled for each shift, and how are the rota shortfalls being resolved?
- 02How do you cover short-notice absences without exhausting existing staff?
- 03What is the plan to restore people's preferred activities, such as going shopping?
- 04How will you make sure visiting professionals and residents do not face delays when staff are busy?
- 05Who is managing the home while there is no registered manager, and when is registration expected?
This was a targeted inspection of specific parts of Safe, including staffing and infection control; it did not assess the whole service or change the previous ratings. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 May 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, December 2021
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found progress since the last inspection, but safety checks and fire safety work still needed attention.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 2 November 2021. One inspector spoke with two people, four staff members and a visiting district nurse. They checked care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home had improved since the previous inspection, when it was rated Inadequate and placed in Special Measures. It was no longer breaching regulations and was no longer in Special Measures. However, some risks were still not identified quickly enough.
People were generally protected from abuse, supported by enough staff and given medicines safely. The home had improved its infection control and risk assessments, but exposed heating pipes, laundry delays and unfinished fire safety work remained concerns.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe and Well-led were both rated Requires Improvement. The report did not give ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive.
Improvement since the last inspection
The home had addressed the previous breaches and was no longer rated Inadequate or placed in Special Measures.
“At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the home was no longer in breach of regulations, however further improvements were still needed.” from the report
Staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough experienced staff and safe recruitment checks. Agency staff were no longer needed, and more regular staff had been recruited.
“The registered manager and the provider had recruited more regular staff. Agency staff were no longer needed in the home, and most staff shortfalls were now covered by regular staff.” from the report
Protection from abuse
Safeguarding concerns were managed and referred appropriately. People told inspectors they felt safe.
“When safeguarding concerns were identified they were managed by the registered manager. Appropriate referrals to the Local Authority and CQC were made in a timely manner.” from the report
Learning from incidents
Accidents and incidents were reviewed, and actions were taken to reduce risks after events such as falls.
“Records showed appropriate actions had been taken following incidents to reduce risk to people.” from the report
Environmental safety
needs fixingExposed heating pipes and an uncovered radiator could cause falls or burns when the heating was on. The provider said this would be reported for repair.
“We found exposed heating pipes in one bedroom and one radiator without a sufficient cover in another.” from the report
Fire safety work unfinished
seriousThe provider had acted on some fire risk recommendations, but urgent work was still outstanding, including replacing four fire doors.
“For example, four fire doors needed to be replaced.” from the report
Laundry arrangements
needs fixingOne commercial washing machine had been out of use for over a month. Soiled laundry had built up, creating a possible delay and a risk of cross-contamination. Care staff were also doing laundry instead of care work.
“This meant there could be delay in washing people's laundry and risk of cross contamination.” from the report
Checks did not find all problems
needs fixingAudits were being completed but did not always identify safety issues, including the exposed radiator and a medicines stock discrepancy.
“However, we found some audits were not fully effective in identifying and addressing quality and safety concerns.” from the report
- 01Have the exposed heating pipes and uncovered radiator now been made safe, and when was this work completed?
- 02Have all four fire doors been replaced, and have the remaining fire risk assessment recommendations been completed?
- 03How are you managing laundry while the commercial washing machine is out of use, and who is responsible for laundry in the afternoons?
- 04How do you check that medicines records and stock counts are accurate, including medicines needed at night?
- 05What changes have you made after reviewing relatives' mixed feedback about communication and staff availability?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection focused on Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were not provided in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 December 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 Eastwood House
5 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- May 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2021Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2021Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- October 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
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. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
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.