CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Newton Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection-control arrangements, testing, PPE, cleaning and visiting processes were in place. The home also said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Newton Lodge was inspected but not rated; inspectors found robust infection-control and visiting arrangements.
This was a targeted inspection on 7 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and the effect of COVID-19 staffing pressures. The visit was announced two days beforehand.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using personal protective equipment safely, arranging testing, managing visitors and admissions, and keeping its infection-control policy up to date. They also found regular cleaning checks and training for staff.
People could see family and friends in a heated garden visiting room or inside the home. The inspection did not give an overall quality rating, or a rated result for Safe.
Infection control
The home had an up-to-date infection-control policy. Staff had training, used the correct PPE and followed the expected procedures.
“Staff completed IPC training and were observed to be wearing the correct PPE and following best practice.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
Visitors were given clear safety checks, including testing, a health questionnaire and temperature checks. People could use a dedicated garden room or visit inside the home.
“There was a robust procedure in place to welcome visitors to the home.” from the report
Support during isolation
During a period when people had to isolate in their rooms, the home provided magazines, jigsaw puzzles and other activities.
“The provider had supported people to have a variety of meaningful activities during a recent period of time when they needed to isolate in their rooms.” from the report
Family contact
The home had processes to support visits in line with government guidance, while allowing families to choose where visits took place.
“However, visitors could also visit within the service if they and their relative wanted to.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently manage COVID-19 or other infection risks for residents and visitors?
- 02Can families still visit in the garden room or inside the home, and what checks are now required?
- 03How do staffing pressures currently affect the care and support provided each day?
- 04What activities are available if a resident needs to isolate in their room?
- 05When was the home last assessed on the other CQC areas, including caring, responsive and well-led?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other five questions or provide an overall quality rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 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, September 2017
Newton Lodge is rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but decision-making assessments needed improvement.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 11 July 2017. They spoke with 11 people, one family member, six staff and the managers. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines, staffing and other records.
The home was safe, caring, responsive and well-led. People were treated with dignity, supported to make choices, helped to stay independent and encouraged to keep important relationships. Medicines were managed safely and there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
The effective rating was Requires Improvement. Staff asked for consent, but the home had not always properly assessed what decisions people could make for themselves under the Mental Capacity Act. The provider had started to improve this, but the new system was not fully in use when inspectors visited.
Safe medicines
Medicines were given by trained staff whose competence had been checked. Records were completed correctly and medicines were available when needed.
“People received their medicines safely, from staff who had completed the appropriate training and had their competency to administer medicines checked.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm relationships and discreet personal care. Staff respected privacy, dignity and people's choices.
“Staff spoke with people with kindness and warmth and were observed laughing and joking with them.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, backgrounds, communication styles and support needs. People were encouraged to take part in activities and daily tasks.
“People received care and treatment that was personalised and met their needs.” from the report
Good leadership
People, relatives and staff could give feedback and raise concerns. The provider and manager used audits, meetings and other checks to monitor the home.
“The registered manager adopted an open and inclusive style of leadership.” from the report
Mental Capacity Act assessments
needs fixingThe home had not always assessed which decisions people could make themselves and where they needed support. A new form had been introduced, but its use was not yet fully established.
“People's ability to make decisions was not always assessed in line with the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 (MCA).” from the report
Menu readability
minorThe lunch and dinner choices were available, but the handwritten menu was difficult for some people to read.
“There was a menu on the board in the dining room but it was hand written on the board and was not easy to read for some people.” from the report
- 01How do you now assess each person's ability to make particular decisions under the Mental Capacity Act?
- 02How do you record best-interest decisions and make sure they are the least restrictive option?
- 03What happens when there is short-notice sickness, and how do you make sure every shift is covered?
- 04How are menus presented so that everyone can understand the available choices?
- 05What changes have been made since the new consent, capacity assessment and best-interest form was introduced?
This was an unannounced inspection of all five key questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 September 2017 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 Newton Lodge
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 June 2015.
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
84 live-in carers within about two hours of Isle of Wight
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 £1,010 to £1,230 a week. 68 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.