CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Newbury Grove
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, using protective equipment safely, testing people and staff, and admitting people safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not rated or assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not rated or assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- This area was not rated or assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not rated or assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and safe visiting arrangements during a COVID-19 outbreak review.
This was a targeted inspection on 8 February 2022. It looked mainly at infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, and asked about staffing pressures.
Inspectors found that the home was following guidance on testing, personal protective equipment, visiting, admissions and managing outbreaks. They were assured that the infection prevention policy was up to date and that staff used protective equipment safely.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Infection control
The home had testing, protective equipment, staff training, outbreak procedures and changes to the building to help control infection.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Safe admissions
People were tested for COVID-19 before they moved into the home.
“People were admitted into the service safely. The provider ensured people had been tested for COVID-19 before admitting them into the home.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
The home supported visits and other contact with families while considering people's needs and the risks from the outbreak.
“Other methods of maintaining contact between people and their families were being effectively supported.” from the report
Staff preparedness
Staff had infection prevention training, and the home had a COVID-19 coordinator to support checks and staff competence.
“Staff had received infection prevention and control training.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are staffing pressures affecting care now, and what measures are in place to reduce any impact?
- 02What testing and protective equipment arrangements are currently used for staff, visitors and people living in the home?
- 03How are family visits managed if there is an outbreak or a person is isolating?
- 04What infection prevention training and competency checks do staff currently receive?
- 05How are new admissions tested and supported before moving into the home?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, including staffing pressures and visiting arrangements; the service was inspected but not rated for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 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, August 2019
Gracewell of Newbury was rated Good overall, with Outstanding personalised support and activities, although staff felt stretched at busy times.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 28 and 29 May 2019. One inspector and an expert by experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care, medicines and mealtimes, and checked care records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. It was rated Outstanding for Responsive. Inspectors found kind and respectful care, safe medicines, good staff training, detailed care plans and effective work with health professionals.
The strongest findings were about personalised care, activities, relationships and end of life support. Staff knew people's histories and preferences and worked with families to improve people's wellbeing. Staff said mornings could be busy and they were sometimes unable to spend as much time with people as they would like.
The home was also rated Good at the previous inspection, published in September 2017. Inspectors found no concerns at this inspection and planned to re-inspect within the usual timescale for services rated Good.
Personalised support
Staff involved people, families and professionals in care planning. Inspectors found that this led to major improvements in some people's mental and physical wellbeing.
“People had experienced exceptional person-centred care, which consistently achieved outstanding outcomes.” from the report
Activities and relationships
Staff found out about people's past interests and helped them restart hobbies and social activities. They also supported people to maintain important family relationships.
“Staff consistently go the extra mile to find out what people have done in the past and evaluate whether they can accommodate activities and make them happen.” from the report
End of life care
The home worked with health professionals to provide compassionate, dignified and individual end of life care. Families and professionals gave very positive feedback.
“The service worked closely with healthcare professionals and provided outstanding end of life care, which ensured people experienced a comfortable, dignified and pain-free death.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff were trained and checked as competent to give medicines. Records showed medicines were given as prescribed, and medicines plans were reviewed.
“People received their prescribed medicines safely, from staff who had their competency to administer medicines assessed.” from the report
Learning and improvement
The home used information about falls, infections and weight loss to introduce a hydration project. Inspectors reported that these problems had reduced.
“Analysis demonstrated that the Hydration Project had a positive impact on the reduction of falls, infections and weight loss experienced by people living in the home.” from the report
Busy morning periods
needs fixingStaff said that mornings could be very busy. They felt stretched and could not always spend as much time with people as they would have liked.
“However, staff also told us that during the busy morning period they were often stretched, which meant they could not always spend as much time as they would like to care for people.” from the report
Previous falls levels
minorThe provider had identified a higher than average level of falls in 2018. Action had been taken and falls had reduced by the inspection, but the home was continuing to monitor them.
“In 2018 the provider had identified through their quality assurance monitoring that there was a higher than average level of falls being experienced by people living at the home.” from the report
- 01How many staff are normally available during the busiest morning period, and what happens if staff feel stretched?
- 02What have the recent figures shown for falls, infections and weight loss since the Hydration Project was introduced?
- 03How are staff matched to my relative's personality, history, interests and communication needs?
- 04How will my relative and our family be involved in reviewing the care plan when their needs change?
- 05What end of life support can the home provide, and how will my relative's personal wishes be recorded and followed?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and the care provided; the previous overall rating was also Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 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 Newbury Grove
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- November 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 November 2017.
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
42 live-in carers within about an hour of West Berkshire
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 36 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“Titus has compassion, patience, a great sense of humour and a very professional attitude.”
“Barbara treated my mother-in-law with enormous love and compassion and provided an environment where she could feel safe and seen”
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.