CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Lowgate Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, January 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control but too few staff against the home's safe staffing guidance.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 07 January 2022. It looked at infection prevention and control during COVID-19, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures.
Inspectors found good infection control arrangements. These included regular testing, visitor screening, suitable PPE, hand sanitiser, cleaning schedules and staff training. They were assured about most infection prevention measures.
There were not enough staff on shift according to the home's own safe staffing guidance. The registered manager worked as a carer to help keep people safe. After the inspection, the provider agreed to review its plans for staff shortages, including whether admissions should be paused.
COVID-19 policies
The home had detailed policies for managing COVID-19 risks, including for people who tested positive.
“The home had comprehensive policies and procedures to manage any risks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.” from the report
Keeping in touch
People and relatives were supported to maintain contact, including through online visits when visitors could not enter.
“People living in the home and their relatives were supported to maintain contact.” from the report
PPE and hygiene
Inspectors saw staff using PPE correctly. PPE, hand sanitiser and cleaning arrangements were available throughout the home.
“There was an ample supply of PPE for staff and any visitors to use.” from the report
Testing and visitor checks
Regular testing was in place for people, staff and visitors. Visitors had to complete screening checks before entering.
“A programme of regular COVID-19 testing for both people in the home, staff, and visitors to the home had been implemented.” from the report
Staffing levels
seriousThere were fewer staff on shift than the provider's own guidance said was safe. The registered manager worked as a carer to help keep people safe, and the provider agreed to review its plans for staff shortages.
“On the day of our inspection we found there were insufficient staff on shift according to the provider's guidance on safe staffing levels.” from the report
- 01How many staff are currently on each shift, and how does this compare with the home's safe staffing guidance?
- 02What changes have been made to the contingency plan for staff shortages since this inspection?
- 03When would the home pause new admissions because of staffing levels?
- 04How will the home make sure people's care is not affected when staff are absent or vacancies are unfilled?
- 05How are COVID-19 testing, visitor screening and PPE arrangements being managed now?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other four key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 January 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, May 2018
Lowgate Care Home rated Good; inspectors found kind, responsive care, with some medicine, security and record-keeping issues addressed or being reviewed.
The inspection took place on 20 and 21 March 2018. It was unannounced on the first day. Inspectors spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and checked care records, medicine records, staff files and safety information.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable training, person-centred care plans, good links with health professionals and a wide range of activities. People and relatives described staff as kind and caring.
There were some shortfalls. Medicines in patch form had not always been applied as prescribed, some 'as required' medicine instructions were missing, and visitors could enter using a shared door code. These issues were addressed or reviewed during the inspection. The home had also improved its premises since the January 2016 inspection and was no longer in breach of Regulation 15.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to keep people safe, including during severe weather. Staff said they did not see agency staff being used.
“We were confident that suitable arrangements and contingency plans were in place to ensure enough staff were on duty at all times.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were attentive and used reassurance and explanations during care. People's dignity, privacy and independence were respected.
“Throughout the inspection the team observed acts of kindness with staff providing care in a compassionate and sympathetic way.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included personal preferences, health needs and practical guidance for staff. Staff discussed changes in needs at handovers.
“Care records were person centred.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could choose from many activities, including music, quizzes, visitors, arts and crafts and religious services. Individual activities were also offered to people who preferred to stay in their rooms.
“There were many activities for people to join in with should they so wish.” from the report
Improved premises
The provider had acted on the premises concerns found at the previous inspection. Inspectors found the home was no longer in breach of that regulation.
“During this inspection, we found the provider had made improvements and were no longer in breach of this regulation.” from the report
Medicine instructions and patches
needs fixingSome medicine patches had not always been applied as prescribed. Instructions for some 'as required' medicines were not always in place, although the manager addressed these issues during the inspection.
“Medicines that were in patch form had not always been applied to the skin as prescribed.” from the report
Visitor access
needs fixingVisitors appeared to know the coded entrance number and could enter without staff seeing them. The manager said the code would be kept secure for staff only.
“This posed a risk as visitors could enter the service unseen.” from the report
Moving and turning records
minorA small number of turn charts were not always completed fully. The manager was aware and was working with staff to improve this.
“We found that a small number had not always been completed fully.” from the report
DBS review
minorSome Disclosure and Barring Service checks were older. Inspectors recommended reviewing the procedure in line with good practice.
“We recommend the provider review their DBS procedures in line with good practice.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure medicine patches are applied correctly and that 'as required' medicine instructions are complete?
- 02How is the coded entrance kept secure so visitors cannot enter unseen?
- 03How do you check that turn charts and other care records are completed fully?
- 04How often are Disclosure and Barring Service checks reviewed or renewed for staff?
- 05What changes have been made to the premises since the previous inspection?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall quality of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 May 2018 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 Lowgate Care Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 February 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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Northumberland
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 £950 to £1,190 a week. 20 can care for a couple. 11 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.