CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Next Steps
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Inspectors found detailed risk assessments, enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable recruitment checks and a clean, well-maintained environment.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had detailed assessments before admission and staff received regular training and supervision. Mental capacity assessments and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisations were in place where needed.
- Caring?
- Good
- People said staff were kind and caring. Inspectors saw respectful, calm and person-centred interactions, including support when people were anxious.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences, goals and aspirations. People were involved in their care and had access to activities, accessible information and a complaints process.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found that the manager and provider had close oversight of the home. Audits, feedback, meetings and reviews were used to monitor the service and identify improvements.
What inspectors found, April 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas they assessed.
Inspectors visited on 17 January 2018. This was the first inspection since the home was registered. They gave 24 hours' notice because the home was small.
They spoke with four people using the service, staff, the manager, the provider, a student nurse and a pharmacist. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, staffing, training, incidents, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, detailed care plans, kind interactions and strong involvement from people and their families.
Detailed risk planning
Risks were assessed with the people involved, and staff knew how to respond to anxiety, agitation and other risks.
“People had robust risk assessments which helped staff to support them in a safe manner.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's health needs, preferences and personal goals. People and their families or representatives were involved in planning care.
“Care plans were person centred and reflected people's needs and included goals and aspirations that people would like to achieve.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw calm, respectful interactions. Staff knew people well and supported them in ways they could understand.
“We observed kind and person centred interactions with people who lived at Next Steps and staff members.” from the report
Choice and activities
People chose how to spend their time and were supported with activities such as football, shopping, going to the cinema and seeing family and friends.
“People made choices in how they wished to spend their day.” from the report
Strong oversight
The manager and provider were visible and involved in the home. Regular audits and feedback were used to monitor the service.
“There were a number of audits in place to monitor the performance of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you complete the pre-assessment and the 12-week assessment before deciding whether the home can meet my relative's needs?
- 02How are medicines administered, checked and reviewed, and who would be responsible for my relative's medicines?
- 03How would my relative's personal goals, activities and contact with family be recorded and reviewed?
- 04If my relative lacks capacity for a decision, how would you involve them, their representative and advocacy services?
- 05What staffing is planned during the day and overnight, including the waking nurse and welfare checks?
This was the first comprehensive inspection of the home and assessed all five CQC questions: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 April 2018 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 Next Steps
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- April 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 January 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Manchester
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 £1,260 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the home.”
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.