Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Eothen Residential Homes - Whitley Bay

Goodpublished 18 January 2019, 7 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2020

Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during the coronavirus outbreak.

This was a targeted, announced inspection on 15 December 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.

Inspectors found that the home had safe arrangements for visitors, social distancing, shielding, admissions, testing, personal protective equipment and hygiene. They were also assured that the infection control policy was up to date.

Staffing was described as safe, with staff working extra hours so the home did not need agency staff. People kept in touch with relatives by telephone and videophone, and staff provided extra one-to-one time.

The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating, and it does not provide a full assessment of all five areas of care.

What inspectors praised
  • Infection control

    Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable measures to prevent and manage infection, including an up-to-date policy.

    “We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
  • Visitors and protective equipment

    Visitors were checked before entering, and the home had protective equipment, handwashing facilities and clear signs.

    “All visitors had to undergo a temperature check and answer a range of relevant questions before leaving the reception area.” from the report
  • Staffing

    Staff worked extra hours during the outbreak, so the home did not need to rely on agency staff. Inspectors found staffing levels were safe and staff were supported by senior leaders.

    “Staff had worked additional hours to ensure the service did not have to rely on agency staff during the coronavirus outbreak.” from the report
  • Keeping people connected

    People used telephone and videophone contact to keep in touch with relatives. Staff also spent extra one-to-one time with people while group activities were not possible.

    “People kept in touch with their relatives via telephone and videophone, whilst the activities co-ordinator and staff spent additional one to one time with people” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What infection prevention and control measures are in place now, and how do they differ from those described in December 2020?
  2. 02How are visits from relatives managed now, including screening, protective equipment and visiting arrangements?
  3. 03What are the current staffing levels, and does the home still rely on staff working additional hours or agency staff?
  4. 04What was the home's most recent full inspection rating for the areas not covered by this targeted inspection?
  5. 05How are activities and one-to-one support provided now that group activities can take place?

This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 December 2020 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.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, November 2020

Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control.

This was an announced, targeted inspection on 19 October 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.

Inspectors found clear infection control arrangements. These included personal protective equipment, extra cleaning, testing, social distancing, safe admissions and updated guidance.

People were helped to stay in contact with relatives through video and telephone calls. Staff had extra infection control training, and the home planned extra staffing without using agency staff.

The home was inspected but not rated overall. Safe was also inspected but not rated. The other four areas were not assessed in this inspection.

What inspectors praised
  • Keeping families connected

    People were supported to stay in touch with relatives through video calls and telephone calls. Relatives also received newsletters about activities and celebrations.

    “People were supported to keep in touch with their family members via videocalls.” from the report
  • Infection control measures

    The home had PPE procedures, clear signs, extra cleaning and regular checks of infection control arrangements.

    “Systems were in place to prevent people, staff and visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
  • Staff preparation

    Staff completed extra infection prevention training. The home planned additional staffing and did not use agency staff during the period inspected.

    “Additional staffing was built into contingency planning, meaning agency staff were not used at any point.” from the report
  • Ongoing monitoring

    The manager used regular infection control audits and kept a live risk assessment and action plan under review.

    “Infection control audits were regularly carried out.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What are the home's current ratings or recent findings for effective, caring, responsive and well-led care?
  2. 02How are infection prevention and control arrangements kept up to date now?
  3. 03How will relatives be supported to keep in touch with residents?
  4. 04What arrangements are in place for staffing cover if regular staff are unavailable?
  5. 05How often are infection control audits and risk assessments reviewed?

This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated overall and the other four key questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 November 2020 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Eothen Residential Homes - Whitley Bay

2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent rating
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read what inspectors found at Eothen Residential Homes - Whitley Bay →

  2. November 2020Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read what inspectors found at Eothen Residential Homes - Whitley Bay →

  3. January 2019Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. June 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. May 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. June 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. July 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  8. October 2011

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  9. December 2010

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

30 live-in carers within about an hour of North Tyneside

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 £950 to £1,130 a week. 26 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.”
Judith W., about Petty Tutsirai C.
See live-in carers near North TynesideProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.