CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Highstone Mews Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including testing, vaccination, hygiene, personal protective equipment and visiting arrangements. The provider also told inspectors it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; the targeted visit found strong COVID-19 infection control and visiting arrangements.
The home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 62 adults, including people living with dementia. At the visit, 31 people were living there.
This was a short, announced, targeted inspection on 27 January 2022. Inspectors focused on infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures linked to COVID-19. They spoke with six staff members and two residents.
Inspectors found the home was meeting the COVID-19 infection control requirements they checked. They found vaccination tracking, testing, personal protective equipment, cleaning arrangements and visiting processes. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infections. These included testing, vaccination records, safe use of protective equipment and suitable cleaning facilities.
“We were assured that the provider was preventing visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
The home asked residents about their preferred visits and supported essential carer visits through its testing arrangements. It also built a visiting pod after residents said they missed their families.
“Staff asked residents for their preferred type of visits; most residents wanted face to face normally but many wanted none during the worst peak waves of Covid.” from the report
Vaccination tracking
The home kept records of staff vaccinations and COVID-19 vaccination information for staff, residents and visitors. Inspectors found it was meeting the vaccination requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals.
“The service maintained a vaccination tracker we reviewed from November 2021.” from the report
Listening to residents and relatives
The home recorded actions taken after feedback about visiting, outings, activities and the environment. It also held infection control and dementia information sessions for relatives.
“We saw evidence the service had responded to feedback and concerns people raised.” from the report
Staff wellbeing
The home had a welfare officer and a monthly staff wellness group during the pandemic. Staff knew about the welfare support available.
“The service supported staff wellbeing through a welfare officer based in Nottingham who we heard was very responsive.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now, and how have they changed since the inspection on 27 January 2022?
- 02How are visits arranged now, including visits from essential carers and relatives?
- 03How do you monitor and respond to staffing pressures when staff are absent because of illness or other reasons?
- 04What are the current arrangements for activities, outings and support for people living with dementia?
- 05When was the home last fully inspected and rated for Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 February 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, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and effective care, with improvements still needed to activities, meal experiences and care review records.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 5 March 2020. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They observed daily life, checked the building, and reviewed care, medicine and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicine systems, good links with health professionals, and care that was kind and respectful.
There were some areas to improve. Activities did not always keep people meaningfully occupied, some intermediate care plans had limited personal detail, and records did not clearly show that people and relatives were involved in care reviews. Inspectors also found some concerns about meal quality, social interaction at mealtimes and the way meal audits were recorded.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough appropriately trained staff, continuity of care and safe systems for ordering, storing and giving medicines.
“There were enough appropriately trained staff available to ensure people's needs were met.” from the report
Strong health support
The home worked closely with health professionals. People receiving intermediate care were supported to recover and become more independent.
“People benefitted from a service with strong links to local healthcare services, and practices for joint working with different health professionals were well-established and effective.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff supported people's dignity, privacy, choices and independence. Inspectors saw reassuring and respectful interactions.
“We observed staff interacted with people in a positive way.” from the report
Person-centred environment
The building had been redesigned with input from people and relatives. Inspectors found personalised rooms and areas designed to support people living with dementia and sensory needs.
“People had real influence in how the building and their rooms were decorated contributing to every aspect of its design.” from the report
Activities were not consistent
needs fixingSome people said there was not enough to do between planned events. The home said it would continue seeking and acting on feedback about activities.
“People commented, "Activities? Don't make me laugh. They want you to sit in the lounge and watch television” from the report
Care review involvement
needs fixingCare was reviewed regularly, but records did not clearly show that people, relatives or representatives had been consulted. This was particularly relevant to intermediate care plans, which contained less personal information.
“We saw limited evidence to show people, their relatives or representatives were consulted as part of this process.” from the report
Mealtime experience
needs fixingInspectors received mixed feedback about food. They saw missed opportunities for conversation and social inclusion upstairs, and one complaint about food was not acted on at the time.
“We saw missed opportunities for quality social interaction and one person told staff their food was sour but this was not acted on.” from the report
Meal-time audits
needs fixingThe home's meal-time audits did not identify the same concerns inspectors found. Audit findings did not always lead to a recorded action plan.
“Meal-time audits did not identify the same concerns we encountered at inspection and audit findings did not always lead to a recorded action plan.” from the report
- 01What has changed to make sure people have meaningful activities between planned events?
- 02How are people and relatives involved in care reviews, particularly for intermediate care placements?
- 03How do you record people's likes, dislikes and what matters to them in intermediate care plans?
- 04How do you respond when someone says their food is poor or not suitable?
- 05How do meal-time audits now identify problems and record the actions taken?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at all five CQC questions and included the care provided and the home environment. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 April 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.
Every inspection of Highstone Mews Care Home
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2017Goodup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2017InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 June 2016.
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
At least 99 live-in carers within about an hour of Barnsley
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. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Ivy was very kind and gentle in all her dealings with my late mother. They got on very well and were able to share a joke and a laugh.”
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.