CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Newday Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed, staff knew how to respond to abuse and emergencies, staffing levels were sufficient, and medicines were given safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and staff received relevant training. Dietary needs and access to healthcare were supported, and staff followed the principles of consent and best-interest decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- People described staff as kind and respectful. Inspectors saw staff involving people in decisions, protecting privacy and dignity, and supporting independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records contained detailed personal preferences. Staff knew people well, offered flexible activities, supported communication needs and investigated complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People and staff felt supported. The manager used audits, feedback, incident reviews and outside advice to monitor quality and make improvements.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Newday Nursing Home rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection on 2 July 2019. One inspector, a nurse specialist adviser and an Expert by Experience visited. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care records, recruitment files, complaints, incidents and quality checks.
Inspectors found enough safely recruited staff, safe medicines practice and good arrangements for managing risks. People were supported with food, healthcare, consent and their individual needs. Staff treated people with kindness, protected their dignity and offered activities based on their interests.
The home was judged Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means inspectors found people's needs were being met and that the service was consistently managed. The previous inspection, published in December 2016, also rated the service Good.
Enough staff
People said there were enough staff, and inspectors saw staff responding promptly. The home adjusted staffing when people's needs changed.
“Staff were visible throughout the service and people's needs were met in a timely way.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored safely, records showed they were given as prescribed, and inspectors saw staff supporting people to take them safely.
“Medication administration records showed that medication had been given as prescribed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff built friendly relationships with people and respected privacy, dignity, choices and personal beliefs.
“All staff, including kitchen and maintenance staff, took time to talk with people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included detailed information about people's preferences. Staff used knowledge of people's histories and interests to shape their support.
“Care records held detailed, personalised information about people.” from the report
Activities and family contact
People could choose from flexible activities, including outings. Family messaging groups helped relatives stay involved, including relatives who did not live locally.
“This system had enabled relatives who are not local to still be involved in the service and their family member's care.” from the report
Learning and improvement
The manager reviewed accidents, complaints and audits, and used reflection and outside advice to improve the service.
“The provider was committed to learning and improving care.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What work from the dementia-friendly refurbishment was still outstanding, and has it now been completed?
- 02How do you assess and review a new person's risks during their settling-in period?
- 03How are people's end of life wishes recorded and kept up to date if their needs change?
- 04How will you involve me in my relative's care and share updates if I cannot visit regularly?
- 05How do you use complaints, minor grumbles and family feedback to make changes?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the overall and question ratings compared with the previous inspection published on 31 December 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 July 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.
What inspectors found, December 2016
Newday Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, responsive care and clear improvements, but saw unsafe hoisting and some medicines guidance that needed attention.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 9 and 10 November 2016. One inspector, a nurse specialist and an expert by experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional. They observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staff files, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably recruited staff, trained staff, safe medicines arrangements, good food and healthcare support, and care that was kind and respectful.
There were some problems during the visit. Inspectors saw two staff members use unsafe hoisting practice, although the manager acted immediately and arranged further training. Some 'when required' medicines instructions lacked detail, and not all staff knew which people were subject to safeguards about restrictions on liberty.
The previous inspection in December 2015 had rated Effective, Caring and Well-led as requiring improvement. Inspectors said those concerns had been addressed, including better care records, improved privacy and dignity, and stronger monitoring by managers.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw a warm atmosphere and staff treating people with dignity. Staff knew people's preferences and supported their independence.
“We observed that people were treated with dignity and respect.” from the report
Food and healthcare support
Staff knew people's dietary needs and preferences. Inspectors saw appropriate responses to weight loss, pressure care and changing healthcare needs.
“We saw that the cook and care staff were knowledgeable regarding people's food preferences, likes and dislikes and dietary needs.” from the report
Improvement since the last inspection
Inspectors found that earlier concerns about care records, privacy, dignity and leadership had been addressed. Managers had introduced audits and action plans to continue improvement.
“At the last inspection of the service, a number of areas of concern were raised. We saw that these areas of concern had been addressed by the registered manager.” from the report
Unsafe hoisting practice
seriousInspectors saw two staff members hoist two people unsafely. The manager acted immediately, arranged training and updated risk assessments, but this was a direct safety concern during the inspection.
“We observed two members of staff hoisting two people and observed the practice to be unsafe.” from the report
Some medicines instructions lacked detail
needs fixingSome guidance for medicines given only when needed did not clearly explain when they should be used. The manager had already identified this in a medicines audit and included it in an action plan.
“We saw for some people, who required medicines that were to be administered 'when required', some protocols lacked detail with regard to the circumstances in which the medicines should be administered.” from the report
Staff knowledge of restrictions
needs fixingNot all staff knew which people were subject to safeguards about restrictions on liberty. The manager put systems in place during the inspection to improve staff awareness.
“We observed all staff obtain people's consent prior to supporting them, but not all staff were aware of who in the home were being deprived of their liberty.” from the report
- 01What checks now show that all staff use hoists safely and have completed the further moving and handling training?
- 02How do you make sure 'when required' medicines have clear instructions about when they should be given?
- 03How are staff told which people have safeguards about restrictions on liberty, and how is their understanding checked?
- 04What changes have been made since the inspection in November 2016?
- 05How are care plans, risk assessments and daily records checked when a person's needs change?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall quality of the service, covering all five CQC questions and reviewing care, medicines, staffing, complaints and quality records. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 December 2016 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 Newday Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- July 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 January 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Birmingham
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 £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.