CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Northfield House Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks, including visitors, protective equipment, testing, hygiene and possible outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Northfield House Residential Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection prevention and control arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 February 2021. It checked how the home was preventing and controlling coronavirus infections.
Inspectors found that visitors were given clear instructions, staff used personal protective equipment and followed social distancing guidance. Visits were booked and usually took place at a window, with phone and video calls available when needed.
Inspectors were assured about visitor safety, shielding, admissions, protective equipment, testing, hygiene, outbreak planning and the infection control policy. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Visitor infection controls
The home displayed clear visitor information and explained the arrangements in person. Inspectors found that visitors were being prevented from bringing in or spreading infections.
“The provider was following best practice guidance in terms of ensuring visitors to the home did not introduce and spread Covid-19.” from the report
Safe family contact
Visits were booked and usually held at a window to protect residents. Phone and video calls were used when visits could not happen.
“When the initial restrictions were lifted staff had engaged with people and their visitors and there was a unanimous decision to keep visits at the window, rather than allow them into the building” from the report
Staff safety
Staff followed protective equipment and distancing guidance. The provider also assessed staff and supported those who were not safe to work to stay at home.
“The provider had assessed staff and where not safe for staff to be at work they were supported to stay at home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently manage visits and protect residents from infections?
- 02How do staff use personal protective equipment and follow infection control procedures now?
- 03How are residents and staff tested, and what happens if someone tests positive?
- 04What arrangements are in place to manage an infection outbreak?
- 05When was the infection prevention and control policy last reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with the Safe question inspected but not rated; it was not a full inspection of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 March 2021 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 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with some periods of limited activity.
This was an unannounced inspection on 04 September 2019. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were safe, received medicines on time, had their health and personal needs supported, and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
People had choices about their food, activities and daily routines. Care plans reflected people's preferences and were reviewed. Inspectors also noted that there were times when people had little stimulation apart from music, and the manager said a wider range of activities was planned.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that staff knew people well and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect.
“People received care from staff that were kind, caring and compassionate.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Medicines were given as prescribed and on time. Staffing levels were achieved, and recruitment checks had been completed.
“Medicines systems were organised, and people received their medicines on time and as prescribed.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's likes, dislikes, hobbies, interests and communication needs. Staff adapted support as people's needs changed.
“Care plans reflected people's likes, dislikes, hobbies and interests and how staff could best support them.” from the report
Positive management
People, relatives and staff knew the management team and said it was approachable. The home used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor quality.
“There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality and standard of the service.” from the report
Limited stimulation at some times
minorInspectors saw periods during the day when people had little to do apart from listening to background music. The manager said a wider variety of activities was planned.
“However, there were times throughout the day when there was little stimulation for people other than music playing in the background.” from the report
- 01What wider variety of activities has been introduced since the inspection, and how do you make sure people are supported when there is no scheduled activity?
- 02How do you review care plans and risk assessments when a person's needs or preferences change?
- 03How will you support my relative's communication, cultural, religious and personal preferences?
- 04How do you make sure staff remain consistent and know each person's needs well?
- 05How are people's end of life wishes recorded and followed?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions; the report says the overall rating and each question rating remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 September 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 Northfield House Residential Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Northfield House Residential Home →
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Northfield House Residential Home →
- January 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 November 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leicestershire
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. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“Together Earther and I supported her to die at home with great dignity and compassion and him to continue with life.”
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.