CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Eden View
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about most infection control arrangements, including visitors, PPE, testing, cleaning and visits. They were only somewhat assured that new people were admitted safely because the latest government guidance was not being followed.
- 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
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control overall, but admission procedures did not follow the latest government guidance.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 January 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
The home had strong measures for visitors, testing, protective equipment, cleaning and infection control. Inspectors were assured about most areas, including visits, PPE, testing, hygiene and managing outbreaks.
Inspectors were only somewhat assured that new people were admitted safely because the home was not following the latest government guidance. The provider was signposted to resources to improve its approach.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for Effective, Caring, Responsive or Well-led.
Visitor safety
The home used several checks and precautions for visitors, including testing, vaccination evidence, temperature checks and protective equipment.
“Robust measures were in place to safely manage any visitors to the home to ensure people were kept safe.” from the report
Regular testing
People living in the home had weekly PCR tests, which was more frequent than the national guidance at that time.
“Due to their vulnerability and high care needs, people living in the service undertook weekly PCR testing to ensure that any positive cases of COVID-19 infection were identified quickly.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and fresh, with staff following cleaning guidance.
“The service was clean and fresh and staff adhered to good practice guidance around cleaning.” from the report
Specialist mask training
Four staff had training to fit specialist masks when supporting people during aerosol generating procedures.
“Four staff had been trained to fit specialist masks used when supporting people who undertook aerosol generating procedures.” from the report
Health service support
The management team reported good support from local health services, particularly the GP surgery.
“The management team reported good support from the local health care services and in particular the GP surgery.” from the report
Admission procedures
needs fixingThe home was not following the latest government guidance for admitting new people. Inspectors signposted the provider to resources to improve its approach.
“The service was not following the most recent government guidance in relation to its admission procedures for new people entering the home.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to admission procedures since inspectors found that the latest government guidance was not being followed?
- 02How do you now check that new people are admitted safely?
- 03How are COVID-19-related staffing pressures managed, and what effect do they have on people's care?
- 04How often are people and staff tested now, and what happens if someone tests positive?
- 05How are visits arranged and what checks are required for visitors?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 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, October 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a newly appointed manager still applying for registration.
This was an unannounced inspection on 15 September 2017. One inspector spoke with people, relatives, staff and the manager. They observed care and checked care, medicine, staffing, recruitment, risk and quality records.
The home was rated Good overall and in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home had nine residents at the time, and the rating remained Good from the previous inspection.
Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines, personalised care plans and kind care. People were supported with food, drink, health needs, activities and complaints. The two previous registered managers had left, and the newly appointed manager was applying for registration.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe. Staff were also able to spend time talking with people and joining activities.
“There were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs in a timely way and to keep people safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were observed treating people with warmth and compassion. They asked permission, explained care and protected people's privacy.
“The interaction we saw between staff and people using the service continued to be kind, caring and attentive.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences. People were supported with hobbies, interests, activities and access to the local community.
“They were personalised to each individual. We found that they were up to date, reflected the person's needs and gave staff detailed guidance” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff understood people's medicines and checks were carried out daily and monthly. Inspectors found that medicines were given safely and as prescribed.
“This meant that people were given their medicines safely and as they were prescribed.” from the report
Quality checks
The home used audits and investigated incidents. People, relatives and staff could give their views about how the home was run.
“A range of audits on various aspects of the service were carried out and any issues found were addressed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Is the current manager registered with the CQC, and how have management arrangements changed since this inspection?
- 02How are risks such as falls, pressure ulcers, moving people and poor nutrition assessed and reviewed now?
- 03How are medicines checked, including daily counts and monthly audits?
- 04How will my relative's care plan reflect their preferences, life story, activities and changing needs?
- 05How can relatives raise concerns, and how are complaints recorded and followed up?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating; the report says the previous overall rating was also Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 October 2017 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 Eden View
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Cambridgeshire
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 £1,020 to £1,200 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 12 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.