CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Needwood House Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected by risk assessments, safeguarding procedures and safe recruitment. Inspectors noted some worn parts of the building, and some medicine documents needed updating, but these were addressed during the inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and reviewed, and staff followed health professionals' advice. Staff had not initially received training covering epilepsy and diabetes, but the provider put this training in place during the inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind, respectful and compassionate. Inspectors saw staff listening to people, supporting their choices and protecting their privacy and dignity.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised to people's preferences and communication needs. People were supported with activities, relationships, complaints and end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The home had management and audit systems, but these did not always identify problems with the environment, training, repositioning records and medicine documentation. The manager acted quickly when inspectors raised these issues.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Rated Good overall, but inspectors found that leadership and quality checks required improvement.
Inspectors visited the home without warning on 6 and 7 June 2023. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care and checked care plans, medicines, recruitment records and management records.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective, caring and responsive care. People said they felt safe and received kind care. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk assessments, personalised care plans, good support with food and drink, and regular contact with health professionals.
The well-led rating was Requires Improvement. Quality checks had not found some worn areas of the building, missing staff training for epilepsy and diabetes, incomplete repositioning records and outdated medicine information. The provider acted during the inspection and said these areas had been improved. They will be checked at the next inspection.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described the care as kind and personalised. Inspectors saw staff talking and laughing with people and supporting meaningful activities.
“People told us they felt safe with the care provided and with the carers supporting them. They said they received care from kind and compassionate staff members.” from the report
Enough suitable staff
Inspectors found enough suitably qualified staff to support people safely, including with one-to-one activities. People and relatives said staff responded promptly.
“There were enough suitable qualified staff on duty to support people safely, including for one-to-one support for people to take part in activities.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's needs, choices, preferences and dietary requirements. People were supported to make choices and take part in activities that mattered to them.
“People's needs, choices and preferences were assessed and recorded in detailed care plans. This included people's dietary needs and requirements.” from the report
Good healthcare support
Staff worked with health and social care professionals and followed their recommendations. Relatives said they were kept informed about health concerns and hospital visits.
“The provider worked closely with a wide range of agencies to provide effective and consistent care.” from the report
Quality checks missed problems
needs fixingAudits were in place but had not identified several areas needing improvement. This included the building, training, repositioning records and medicine information.
“Although they had not always identified some of the areas of improvement we identified.” from the report
Worn areas of the building
needs fixingSome paint and rails were chipped, a plug socket was broken and some chairs were scratched. These issues were corrected during the inspection, while larger renovation plans were being considered.
“Some areas of the home looked tired and did not always meet infection prevention and control standards.” from the report
Staff training gaps
needs fixingStaff had not received training covering all the health conditions people experienced, including diabetes and epilepsy. Additional training was arranged during the inspection and nearly all staff had completed it before the inspection ended.
“However, staff had not received training covering all the health conditions people experienced, such as diabetes and epilepsy.” from the report
Records needed updating
needs fixingRepositioning charts did not record the person's position, and some medicine documents contained outdated information. The provider introduced a new recording system and updated the medicine documents.
“The charts did not detail how the person was repositioned such as on their left side, right side or back.” from the report
- 01What renovation work has been completed since the inspection, and what work is still planned?
- 02Have all staff completed training on epilepsy and diabetes, including agency staff?
- 03How do you now check that repositioning records show each person's actual position?
- 04How do you check that medicine records are up to date and do not contain confusing information?
- 05What evidence can you show that the new quality audits identify problems promptly?
This was the first inspection of the newly registered service and assessed all five key questions; it was prompted partly by concerns about safeguarding, staffing, mental capacity assessments and unsafe care practices. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 July 2023 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 Needwood House Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2023
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 February 2023.
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 Staffordshire
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. 85 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.