CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Nashley House Retirement Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were being followed. They found measures covering visitors, social distancing, admissions, PPE, testing, cleaning and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Rated Good overall; inspectors found strong infection-control arrangements, but Safe was inspected and not rated.
This was an announced thematic review on 03 November 2020. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found good arrangements for visitors, deliveries, cleaning, personal protective equipment and testing. The home had isolation bedrooms, plans for outbreaks and a safe visiting pod.
The overall rating was Good. Safe was inspected but not rated. The report does not give ratings for Effective, Caring, Responsive or Well-led in this inspection.
Visitor safety
Visitors were admitted through controlled entry, asked health questions and required to wash or sanitise their hands. PPE was required in line with guidance.
“Visitors to the service were admitted through a locked gate and taken through hand washing, sanitising and health questions on arrival at the service.” from the report
Safe visits
The home arranged socially distanced visits in a heated, cleanable pod. It included an intercom and features intended to help people with hearing difficulties.
“The pod was heated, could be easily cleaned, and had intercom access to the dining room.” from the report
Isolation arrangements
Two bedrooms were set aside for people newly admitted, with assigned staff and a 14-day isolation period. Other arrangements were available if someone needed to isolate in their bedroom.
“Two bedrooms had been designated as 'isolation' for people admitted to the service.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the areas they saw clean and fresh smelling. A cleaning rota, including deep cleaning, was in place.
“All areas we saw were clean and fresh smelling.” from the report
Staff teamwork
Staff reported good morale and said they worked well together. Managers had also put measures in place to support staff wellbeing.
“Staff told us morale was good and they said they worked well together as a team.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently admitted, and what checks and protective equipment are still required?
- 02How would you isolate a new resident or someone who developed an infection?
- 03How do you arrange visits for people who are approaching the end of their life?
- 04What testing arrangements are in place for residents and staff?
- 05What is your current plan if part of the home needs to be separated during an outbreak?
This was a thematic review focused on infection prevention and control; Safe was inspected but not rated, and the other four questions were not assessed in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 November 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.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Nashley House Retirement Home was rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with effective management.
This was a planned comprehensive inspection on 14 June 2019. Inspectors observed care, spoke with 12 people, seven families, six staff and three health and social care professionals. They also reviewed five care records, five staff files and other records.
The home was calm and clean. Inspectors found enough suitably checked and trained staff, safe medicines systems and good arrangements for managing risks and infections. People received support with food, healthcare and decisions about their care.
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Care was personalised, activities reflected people's interests, and concerns were listened to. The home had regular audits and a manager and staff team who understood their responsibilities.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection, published in December 2016, was also rated Good.
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, recorded and given safely. Staff had training and their competence was checked.
“All medicines were managed safely and in line with national guidance.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People appeared relaxed and comfortable with staff. Inspectors saw warm interactions and support that respected people's dignity and choices.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect, and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people's histories, preferences and changing needs. Care plans were developed with people and updated when support needs changed.
“People had care plans and they took part in developing these so that they respected individual wishes.” from the report
Activities and choice
People could choose activities and outings that interested them. The home also supported hobbies and contributions to the local community.
“People were offered and provided with activities and outings of interest.” from the report
Regular quality checks
The management team used audits, meetings, feedback and reviews of incidents to monitor the service and make changes.
“Monthly audits were carried out for health and safety, infection control, the environment, care documentation, staffing levels, training, staff supervision and medication.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you meet my relative's needs if they required nursing care, which the home does not provide?
- 02How do you adjust staffing levels when residents' needs change?
- 03How will you support my relative's particular food, swallowing or weight-loss needs?
- 04What activities and outings would be suitable for my relative's interests and abilities?
- 05How will you keep our family informed about any changes, concerns or incidents?
This was a planned comprehensive inspection of the care and premises, and all five ratings were assessed; the previous inspection in 2016 was also rated Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 August 2019 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 Nashley House Retirement Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Nashley House Retirement Home →
- August 2019Goodstayed Good
Read what inspectors found at Nashley House Retirement Home →
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of North Somerset
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 £1,050 to £1,320 a week. 19 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.