CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Field View
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from avoidable harm. Risk assessments, safeguarding, medicines, staffing, recruitment and infection control were managed effectively.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection, although inspectors heard positive comments about staff's care and compassion.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found the home was consistently managed and well-led. Managers reviewed the service, acted on incidents and used action plans to improve care.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring support and strong management, with some further training needed on recording capacity assessments.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 31 May, 5 June and 7 June 2023. Inspectors reviewed records, medicines, staff files and management systems. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff overall, safe recruitment, suitable medicines arrangements, clear risk assessments and good infection control. People said they felt safe and described staff as kind, skilled and caring.
The home had systems to review incidents and make improvements. Inspectors noted that staff needed more confidence and better records when assessing people's mental capacity. The other key question ratings were not inspected in this visit and were carried over from the previous inspection.
Safe care and medicines
Risk assessments gave staff clear guidance on reducing harm. Medicines were received, stored, given and disposed of safely.
“People's medicines were appropriately managed. Medicines were safely received, stored, administered and destroyed when required.” from the report
Kind and caring staff
People and relatives spoke positively about the staff. Inspectors observed kind and compassionate interactions.
“People told us they felt safe. We observed staff interact with people in a kind and compassionate manner.” from the report
Good staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and recruitment checks were completed properly.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Active management
The management team reviewed incidents, monitored improvements and acted quickly when inspectors identified changes that were needed.
“The provider and registered manager regularly reviewed the systems and processes in the service to determine if improvements could be made.” from the report
Mental capacity records
needs fixingThe manager recognised that staff needed to improve how they recorded capacity assessments. Additional training was being organised.
“However the registered manager found staff needed to improve how they recorded information on capacity assessment and was organising additional training.” from the report
Occasional pressure on staffing time
minorAlthough inspectors found staffing was sufficient overall, some staff said that at times more staff were needed to give care with enough time.
“A couple of staff mentioned on occasions a few more staff were needed to ensure staff had the time to give the care required.” from the report
- 01What extra training have staff completed on the Mental Capacity Act and capacity assessments?
- 02How do managers check that capacity assessments are recorded correctly and kept up to date?
- 03How do you respond when staff say they need more time or more staff to provide care?
- 04What changes have been made since inspectors identified the need for plans when people had lost weight?
- 05Which ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection, and when will these areas next be reviewed?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; the other key question ratings were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 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, October 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control, with PPE storage identified for improvement.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 8 September 2021. It was a targeted inspection focused on infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home managed visitors, admissions, testing, social distancing, cleaning, outbreaks and visits safely. They also found staff had relevant PPE training and that people were supported to keep in touch with relatives.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a full rating for all five areas of care. Inspectors signposted the provider to resources about storing PPE.
Infection prevention
The home had systems to help prevent infections spreading between people, staff and visitors.
“Systems were in place to prevent people, staff and visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic, with extra cleaning of shared areas and frequently touched surfaces.
“The home was clean and hygienic. Additional cleaning of all areas and frequent touch surfaces was being carried out regularly.” from the report
PPE training
Staff had training in using PPE and other relevant infection control training.
“Staff had undertaken training in putting on and taking off PPE and other relevant training.” from the report
Contact with relatives
People and their relatives were supported to stay in contact through technology and visits in a dedicated room.
“People and their relatives were supported to keep in contact using a range of technology.” from the report
PPE storage
minorInspectors asked the provider to use resources to develop its approach to storing PPE. The report does not give further detail about the storage arrangements.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources regarding the storage of PPE to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01How is PPE stored now, following the inspectors' signposting about improving storage?
- 02How are visitors currently supported to visit people safely?
- 03How do you carry out testing for people living here and staff?
- 04What arrangements are in place if a person moves into the home and needs to self-isolate?
- 05What was the outcome of the most recent full inspection covering care quality, staffing and management?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 October 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 Field View
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 October 2011.
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
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
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 £960 to £1,210 a week. 42 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.”
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.