CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Jubilee Court
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- People received their medicines when needed, but medicine records had gaps and some medicines were not dated when opened. Recruitment checks and monitoring of nurses' registration were also not always robust.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training, worked with therapists and other professionals, and supported people's health and rehabilitation goals. Inspectors noted some records did not clearly show what action was taken when food or fluid targets were not met.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind, respectful and supportive. Staff involved people in decisions, protected their privacy and encouraged independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care and rehabilitation plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported with communication, relationships, activities, complaints and planning for future care.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The manager and staff were described as approachable and supportive, but management systems did not always identify or address medicine, recruitment and registration problems quickly enough.
What inspectors found, March 2020
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, effective care, but medicines, recruitment and management checks were not always reliable.
Inspectors visited without notice on 20 and 22 January 2020. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health and social care professionals. They observed care and checked care records, medicine records, staff files and quality checks.
People generally said they felt safe and received their medicines when needed. Staff were caring and supported people to build independence through personalised rehabilitation. The home was rated Good for Effective, Caring and Responsive care.
Inspectors found gaps in medicine records, including missing opening dates, and gaps in recruitment checks. They also found that checks on nurses' registration were not robust. The home acted on these issues during the inspection, but the overall rating was Requires Improvement.
The previous overall rating was Good in August 2018. Safe and Well-led both fell from Good to Requires Improvement. The report says the inspection was prompted partly by concerns about care and staff professionalism, but inspectors found no evidence that people were harmed by those concerns.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives reported positive relationships with staff. Inspectors saw staff treating people with dignity and encouraging them.
“People and relatives told us staff promoted their privacy and dignity.” from the report
Personalised rehabilitation
People helped set their care and rehabilitation goals. Staff and therapists worked together to support progress and independence.
“People had individualised rehabilitation plans which were regularly reviewed monitoring peoples progress to reach their potential.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to see family and friends and take part in activities they chose, including outings, cooking, arts and crafts and study.
“People told us they were supported to maintain relationships and to undertake meaningful activities of their choice.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked with therapists, health professionals and social care colleagues to meet people's needs and plan rehabilitation or discharge.
“Staff worked in partnership with the on-site therapist team to support people with their exercises, to maximise their rehabilitation potential.” from the report
Medicine records
seriousMedicine practices were inconsistent. Some records were incomplete, including missing opening dates and gaps in monitoring tube feeding sites.
“Medicines practices were not always consistent. We found some gaps in records for example, dates had not been recorded on one bottle of eye drops and liquid medicines when they were opened.” from the report
Recruitment checks
seriousSome staff started work before all required recruitment information had been checked. Employment gaps and missing references had not always been explored or explained.
“Not all of the required recruitment information had been obtained and verified before staff commenced employment.” from the report
Nurse registration checks
seriousChecks on nurses' registration were not robust. Inspectors found one nurse had practice restrictions that had not been fully checked or disclosed.
“The monitoring of the registration status of the nursing staff employed was not always robust.” from the report
Safeguarding reporting
seriousAfter the inspection, CQC received information about a safeguarding concern that had not been reported to the appropriate agencies promptly. The report says this was being investigated.
“we received information about a safeguarding concern which had not been reported to the appropriate agencies in a timely manner.” from the report
- 01What checks are now completed before a new staff member starts, including employment history and references?
- 02How do you check and record the registration status and any practice restrictions of every nurse?
- 03What changes have been made to medicine records, including dating liquid medicines and eye drops when opened?
- 04How are tube feeding sites and other medicine-related risks checked between audits?
- 05Have the two additional support staff been recruited, and how do you cover sickness-related staff shortages?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including care, premises, records, medicines, staffing and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 March 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 Jubilee Court
6 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- March 2020Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 April 2019.
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 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Dudley
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 £1,230 a week. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
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.