CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Needham Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing and managing infection risks. They also asked about staffing pressures and were told measures were in place to reduce the risks linked to COVID-19 staff pressures.
- 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, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and support for visits during COVID-19 pressures.
This was a targeted inspection on 11 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, and asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
They found the home was clean. Staff used suitable personal protective equipment, had training, and there were enough supplies. Testing, vaccination checks, cleaning and infection control arrangements were in place.
People were supported to keep in touch with relatives through visits and technology. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a full rating of the care provided.
Infection control
The home had systems to reduce the spread of infection among people, staff and visitors.
“Systems were in place to help prevent people, staff and visitors from catching or spreading infection.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean, with extra cleaning of frequently touched surfaces.
“The environment was clean. Additional cleaning was taking place, including of frequently touched surfaces.” from the report
PPE and staff training
Staff had suitable PPE, training in its use and access to supplies around the home. The manager also checked supplies weekly.
“Staff wore appropriate PPE and there were sufficient supplies.” from the report
Contact with relatives
People could keep in touch with relatives through technology and different types of visits, including during an outbreak.
“People and their relatives were supported to keep in contact using a range of technology as well as visits to the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What is the home’s current overall CQC rating, given that this inspection was not rated?
- 02How are you currently managing staffing pressures linked to COVID-19 or other infections?
- 03How are visits from relatives arranged now, including during an outbreak?
- 04How often are PPE supplies checked, and how is staff training in using PPE kept up to date?
- 05What testing and vaccination checks are currently in place for people, staff and visiting professionals?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 March 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 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with some staff training overdue.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 20 March 2019 and 01 April 2019. Inspectors reviewed care plans, medicine records, staffing records, safety checks and quality audits. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff, managers and a healthcare professional.
Inspectors found that people felt safe and received good care. Medicines were managed safely, risk assessments were reviewed, the home was clean, and staff supported people with food, healthcare, activities and decisions about their care. People and relatives consistently described staff as kind and caring.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The overall rating was Good, the same as at the previous inspection published in October 2016. The report also noted that mandatory training for some staff was out of date, although dates had been arranged for this training.
Safe medicines
Inspectors found that medicines were received, stored, given and disposed of safely. People and relatives said medicines were given on time.
“Medicines continued to be handled safely and in line with national guidelines.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was found to be clean, tidy and free from unpleasant smells. Infection control equipment and cleaning materials were available.
“The premises were very clean, tidy and free from bad smells.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives consistently described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw positive interactions and respect for privacy and dignity.
“We saw lots of positive and genuine interactions between staff and people as well as lots of positive interaction between people themselves.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans were created with people, relatives and healthcare professionals. They reflected people's interests and were reviewed regularly when needs changed.
“Care plans had been created with involvement of people, their relatives and with input from healthcare professionals.” from the report
Listening and improvement
Managers used audits, meetings and questionnaires to gather feedback and identify actions. Staff said the manager was supportive and approachable.
“The manager operated an open-door policy and was approachable and listened to any concerns they wanted to raise.” from the report
Some training was overdue
needs fixingThe training records showed that mandatory training for some staff was out of date. Dates had been arranged for the staff affected to complete it.
“A review of the provider's training matrix identified mandatory training for some staff was out of date.” from the report
- 01Which mandatory training was out of date at the inspection, and has all of it now been completed?
- 02How do you check that staff have the skills needed to support people living with dementia?
- 03How often will my relative's care plan and risk assessments be reviewed?
- 04How will you involve my relative and our family in care decisions and reviews?
- 05What activities and outings would be available for my relative based on their interests?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including both the care provided and the premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 May 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 Needham Court
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 October 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of South Tyneside
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 £1,140 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.