CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Euroclydon Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed, staff knew how to protect people from harm, medicines were managed safely and there were enough staff. Infection prevention and recruitment arrangements were also found to be suitable.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. The report does not give a new rating for it.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. The report does not give a new rating for it.
- Responsive?
- Good
- People received personalised care, activities and support to maintain relationships. Staff understood people's communication needs, responded to complaints and worked with health professionals when needs changed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers used audits, quality visits, meetings and feedback to identify and address concerns. People, relatives and staff said they were listened to and supported.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, responsive and well-led care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 20 and 22 June 2023. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They reviewed care records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall, with Good ratings for Safe, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable care plans, appropriate safeguarding arrangements and effective checks on medicines and infection control.
People received activities and support that reflected their preferences. Staff knew people's needs and worked with healthcare professionals. Complaints and incidents were reviewed, and managers used audits and meetings to make improvements.
The previous inspection had rated the service Requires Improvement and found breaches about person-centred care and governance. This inspection found the required improvements had been made, and the home was no longer in breach of those regulations.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. The home used permanent or bank staff and did not use agency staff.
“Suitable staffing levels were in place to meet the needs of people using the service.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences. Staff supported people with individual interests, activities and relationships.
“People now received activities and engagements which reflected their needs and preferences.” from the report
Positive culture
People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the management team and the caring culture. Inspectors observed positive interactions between staff and people.
“People and their relatives spoke positively about the registered manager and clinical lead and the caring culture of the staff.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The management team carried out audits and monthly quality visits. They recorded shortfalls and the actions taken to address them.
“The provider carried out monthly quality assurance visits of the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you maintain the staffing levels that inspectors found during this inspection?
- 02How are activities chosen and reviewed to make sure they continue to reflect each person's interests and preferences?
- 03How do you check that care plans are updated when a person's needs or health changes?
- 04What actions come from your audits and monthly quality visits, and how do you check that those actions are completed?
- 05How will you make sure the improvements made after the previous inspection are sustained?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led only; Effective and Caring were not inspected during this visit and the report says the overall rating used ratings from the previous inspection for key questions not inspected. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 July 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, December 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found progress, but care records, activities, medicines systems and oversight still had important gaps.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 8 and 10 November 2022. Inspectors checked Safe, Responsive and Well-led. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
There had been some improvement since the previous inspection. Staffing levels had increased, environmental risks were better assessed, and mental capacity records had been reviewed. Infection control arrangements were also found to be suitable.
However, care plans were not always current or personalised. Activities were limited for some people, and medicines and recruitment records were not always managed consistently. The new quality checks were not yet fully effective, so the home remained rated Requires Improvement for Safe, Responsive and Well-led, and overall.
Staffing had improved
The home had increased nursing and care hours at key times. People, relatives and staff said there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
“Suitable staffing levels were in place to meet the needs of people using the service.” from the report
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe. Staff knew how to report concerns and the managers were visible in the home.
“People and their relatives told us they felt the home was safe.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, use of protective equipment, testing, visiting arrangements and managing possible outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
End of life support
Staff worked with health professionals to support people at the end of their lives. Some people's wishes were recorded and known to staff.
“People were cared for at the end of their life through the service working in partnership with health professionals.” from the report
Medicines were not always managed safely
seriousTwo people were put at risk of not receiving medicines as prescribed. The manager took immediate action, but the medicines systems were not yet fully implemented.
“Two people had been placed at risk of not receiving their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Care was not always personalised
seriousSome care plans were incomplete, missing or did not describe people's needs, preferences and the support staff provided. Activities and engagement were also limited for some people.
“People did not always receive care which was personalised to their needs and promoted their wellbeing.” from the report
Quality checks were not effective enough
seriousThe home's monitoring systems had not found some of the problems identified by inspectors. Records were not always current, complete or accurate, creating a risk of harm.
“Quality assurance and monitoring systems were not fully embedded and were not fully effective at addressing the shortfalls we identified on inspection.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThere was no registered manager in post. The manager in place intended to apply but had not started the registration process at the time of inspection.
“At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01How are you making sure each person's care plan is current, complete and based on their preferences?
- 02What activities are now available for people who previously became bored or spent much of their time watching television?
- 03What changes have been made to prevent medicines being missed or not given as prescribed?
- 04Has the manager started the process to register with CQC, and what is the current position?
- 05How are you checking that water safety, recruitment records and other quality systems are being completed properly?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led; the other key question ratings were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 December 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.
Every inspection of Euroclydon Nursing Home
11 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- July 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2022Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2022Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2021Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvement
- November 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- March 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvement
- June 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Gloucestershire
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 £1,030 to £1,360 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.