CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Newlands Nursing Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed, staff understood people’s needs, medicines were stored and given safely, staffing was sufficient and recruitment checks were completed.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward into the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Inspectors did observe positive interactions and heard positive comments from people and relatives.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward into the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found new quality checks, action plans and clinical risk meetings were helping the home identify concerns and improve care.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found improvements in safety and management after the previous Requires Improvement rating.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 9 and 10 May 2023. One inspector and two Experts by Experience spoke with people, relatives and staff, reviewed care and staff records, and checked the home’s management systems.
Inspectors rated Safe and Well-led as Good. They found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments, safe medicines arrangements, infection control measures and better care records. People and relatives said they felt safe and spoke positively about the staff and management.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement, with breaches linked to records, recruitment, quality monitoring and the statement of purpose. The provider had completed an action plan, and inspectors found the home was no longer in breach. The overall rating changed to Good, although some areas were not inspected during this visit.
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were based on people’s needs and occupancy. The home used permanent or bank staff and did not use agency staff.
“Suitable staffing levels were in place to meet the needs of people using the service.” from the report
Good safety records
People had detailed care plans and risk information. Staff could explain how they supported people with mobility, diets, anxiety and other risks.
“Each person had detailed care plans in relation to their needs and risks.” from the report
Safe medicines and infection control
Inspectors found that medicines were stored safely and given as prescribed. They were also assured that infection prevention measures and protective equipment were being used effectively.
“People's medicines were stored safely, and they received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Improved management checks
The new management team had introduced audits covering areas such as medicines, infection control, incidents and health and safety. Actions were recorded and followed up.
“The management team and representatives of the provider had implemented a range of quality assurance audits to ensure a good standard of service was maintained.” from the report
Positive relationships
People and relatives described staff as kind, dependable and helpful. Inspectors observed positive interactions and found that people enjoyed activities and time with staff.
“We observed positive interactions between people and staff throughout our inspection.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you checking that care plans remain personalised and are updated when someone’s needs change?
- 02What do your medicines, infection control and health and safety audits currently show, and how are outstanding actions followed up?
- 03How are applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards being progressed for people who need them?
- 04How will the new management arrangements continue the improvements found by inspectors?
- 05What checks are made on the individual apartments and cottages, given that this inspection did not cover people’s own accommodation?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the previous inspection, and people’s individual accommodation was not inspected. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 May 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.
What inspectors found, November 2022
Newlands Nursing Care Centre is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, responsive care, but gaps in risk records, recruitment and oversight.
This was an unannounced inspection on 8 and 9 September 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, a relative, staff and professionals. They reviewed care records, medicine records and management documents.
People generally said they felt safe and that staff responded to their needs. Inspectors found enough staff, kind interactions, good activities, suitable infection control and appropriate support with medicines. Complaints were handled and people's choices, relationships and end of life wishes were supported.
However, three people receiving care in their own homes had no care plans or risk assessments. Recruitment checks were incomplete, and quality checks had not found these problems or fully recorded risks such as legionella. The overall rating fell from Outstanding at the previous inspection in 2018. The report only inspected Safe, Responsive and Well-led, so some ratings used for the overall result carried over from the earlier inspection.
Enough staff
Inspectors saw enough staff to meet people's needs, and staff said they had time to support people's wellbeing.
“There were enough staff deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind interactions
Inspectors observed positive interactions between staff and people. People and relatives also spoke positively about the caring culture.
“People and their relatives provided positive feedback on the care and support they or their loved one had received.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People had access to activities, shared facilities and support to maintain contact with relatives.
“People were supported with a range of activities provided by concierge, activity and care staff.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements to prevent and manage infection, including the safe use of protective equipment.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Missing risk and care records
seriousThree people receiving care in their own homes had no care plans or risk assessments. One person also lacked records about health symptoms and support needed if their health worsened.
“For three people, who were cared for in their own homes there were no care plans or risk assessments in place.” from the report
Incomplete recruitment checks
seriousReferences from previous health or social care employers were not always obtained. Some employment history gaps were unexplained.
“The required pre-employment checks had not always been fully undertaken.” from the report
Weak quality monitoring
seriousAudits did not identify the problems found with care records, recruitment and management of the legionella risk. Some care plan audits also failed to ensure that changes in need were recorded.
“The provider had not consistently operated systems to monitor, assess and improve the service they provided.” from the report
Statement of purpose was out of date
seriousThe provider had not updated its statement of purpose to describe nursing care being provided to people in their own homes.
“The provider had not revised and updated their statement of purpose.” from the report
- 01Have all residents receiving care in their own accommodation now got up-to-date care plans and risk assessments?
- 02What checks are now completed before new staff start, including references from previous health or social care employers?
- 03How are risks such as legionella recorded, managed and checked?
- 04How have your audits changed so they identify missing or outdated care records?
- 05What is the current arrangement for nursing tasks provided in people's own homes, including work directed by GPs?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led; Effective and Caring were not inspected, and ratings for uninspected questions carried over from the 2018 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 November 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.
Every inspection of Newlands Nursing Care Centre
5 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Newlands Nursing Care Centre →
- November 2022Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Newlands Nursing Care Centre →
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2018Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodup from Requires improvementEffective: GoodResponsive: Good
- November 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Gloucestershire
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 £1,030 to £1,360 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.