CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Home Close
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed, including visitor screening, testing, protective equipment, social distancing, safe admissions and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not covered by the targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not covered by the targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not covered by the targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not covered by the targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Home Close was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection prevention and control measures during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 23 February 2021. It checked how well the home was preventing and controlling infections during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found that visitors were screened, tested and given protective equipment. They were assured that the home was managing testing, personal protective equipment, social distancing, admissions and possible outbreaks safely.
The home was clean and hygienic, with regular cleaning and weekly deep cleaning. The overall service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not provide a full quality rating.
Visitor safety checks
Visitors were checked for temperature, tested for COVID-19 and given protective equipment. Visits were being carefully managed to reduce infection risks.
“All visitors to the service had their temperature checked, undertook a COVID-19 test, completed a health questionnaire and were provided with personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic. Regular cleaning and weekly deep cleaning were in place.
“The service was clean and hygienic. Robust cleaning schedules were in place.” from the report
Risk planning
The provider had updated its infection control policies and thoroughly assessed health and safety risks linked to the pandemic.
“Risks to people and staff in relation to their health, safety and wellbeing had been thoroughly assessed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently screened, tested and supported to use personal protective equipment?
- 02How are visits arranged and how is the visiting area cleaned between visits?
- 03How often are people living in the home and staff tested for COVID-19?
- 04What arrangements are in place to prevent or manage an infection outbreak?
- 05How are new admissions assessed and kept safe from infection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, and the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 March 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.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and well-organised care, with one medicines-record issue corrected during the visit.
This was an unannounced inspection on 19 December 2019. Inspectors spoke with six people, two relatives and nine staff. They observed care and reviewed care records, staff files, medicines information and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training and care that respected people's choices, privacy and dignity.
One issue was found with missing protocols for some medicines given only when needed. The manager addressed this straight away. The home was being run by an operations manager because there was no registered manager in post.
The overall Good rating means inspectors found the service was performing well and meeting the relevant standards at the time of the inspection. The Caring rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good since the previous inspection.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw warm interactions and found that privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
“People spoke about the staff. They used words such as, fantastic, caring, kind, and respectful.” from the report
Safe staffing and training
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and recruitment checks were completed. Staff received training, induction and support.
“There were enough staff to support people's care needs in a timely manner.” from the report
Personalised care
Care records included people's likes, dislikes, communication needs and wishes. Staff knew the people they supported and respected their choices.
“People's care records continued to be personalised and gave staff guidance on people's likes and dislikes” from the report
Good leadership and checks
The management team used audits and action plans to identify and address improvements. Staff were encouraged to speak up and attend meetings.
“The management team carried out a range of audits.” from the report
End of life support
Staff discussed and recorded people's wishes and worked with health professionals to support people to remain at the home where possible.
“The staff team ensured that people's wishes were fulfilled at the end of their lives.” from the report
Some medicines protocols were missing
needs fixingProtocols were not in place for all medicines prescribed to be given when needed. The operations manager addressed this during the inspection, but families should check how the improvement is monitored.
“Not all protocols were in place for medicines prescribed to be administered 'when required'” from the report
No registered manager
minorThere had been no registered manager since July 2018. The operations manager was running the home, and inspectors found the leadership to be strong.
“There was not a registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01What action was taken to put all 'when required' medicines protocols in place?
- 02How do you now check that medicines protocols remain complete and up to date?
- 03Who is responsible for managing the home while there is no registered manager?
- 04How will you make sure my relative's preferences, communication needs and end of life wishes are recorded and followed?
- 05What activities would be suitable for my relative, including if they do not want to join group activities?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions; the Caring rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good and the other ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 February 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 Home Close
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 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.