CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Northfield Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found safe medicines management, enough staff, suitable risk assessments, safe recruitment and effective infection control. They recommended keeping a copy of people's emergency plans with the emergency bag.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried forward from the last comprehensive inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried forward from the last comprehensive inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried forward from the last comprehensive inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found regular audits, open communication, positive feedback and a management team that staff and relatives found approachable. The manager was still waiting for CQC registration to be completed.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Northfield Nursing Home is rated Good; inspectors found safe care and strong management, with improvements made to medicines and a recommendation about emergency plans.
This was an unannounced inspection on 19 April 2023. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found medicines were managed safely, staffing was sufficient, risks were assessed, the home was clean, and accidents were reviewed for lessons. People and relatives gave positive feedback about the care and management.
This inspection did not assess Effective, Caring or Responsive. Their ratings were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection, so the overall rating remained Good. The previous inspection had rated Safe as Requires Improvement because of medicines issues, which inspectors found had been addressed.
Medicines improved
The home had acted on the previous inspection's recommendation. Medicines records contained enough information and staff had been checked as competent.
“Medicines were managed safely. There were systems in place to support people to receive their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff knew how to report abuse and the provider made safeguarding referrals when needed.
“People told us they felt happy and safe living at the service and knew who to talk to if they felt unsafe.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors saw staff responding to call bells and meeting people's needs promptly. Staff and people also said staffing was generally sufficient.
“There were enough staff to keep people safe. During the inspection we observed people's needs being met in a timely manner.” from the report
Positive management
People, relatives and staff gave positive feedback about the management team. Audits and checks were used to identify and address issues.
“People, their relatives and staff had confidence in the management team and felt they were approachable.” from the report
Clean and adapted home
The building had been redecorated and refurbished since the previous inspection. Inspectors found it clean, bright and adapted to people's needs.
“The building was adapted to meet people's individual needs, there had been redecoration and refurbishment of the building since our last inspection.” from the report
Emergency plan copies
needs fixingPeople's personalised emergency plans were kept in support plans on each floor. Inspectors recommended also keeping copies with the emergency bag in the foyer.
“We recommended a copy of these plans also be kept with the emergency bag situated in the foyer of the home.” from the report
Manager registration delay
minorThe manager was in the process of being registered with CQC. An administrative issue had delayed the assessment of the application.
“There had been an administrative issue which meant there had been a delay in CQC assessing this application.” from the report
- 01Have copies of all personalised emergency plans now been placed with the emergency bag in the foyer?
- 02Has the manager's CQC registration application now been completed?
- 03How often are medicines audits carried out, and what happens when an issue is found?
- 04How do you check that staff remain competent to manage medicines?
- 05How do you monitor staffing levels when people's needs or the number of intermediate and rehabilitative placements change?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; the Effective, Caring and Responsive ratings were carried forward from the last comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 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, April 2022
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind and effective care, but medicines safety needed improvement.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 17 November and 1 December 2021. Inspectors reviewed Safe, Effective and Well-led. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, and checked medicines, care records, staff records and management systems.
People said they felt safe and cared for. Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, safe recruitment, good infection control, suitable equipment and timely healthcare. People were supported to make choices, and the food was generally well received.
The main weakness was medicines safety. Fridge temperature checks were not always recorded, two people's eye-drop use-by dates were missing, and two nurses had overdue competency checks. The building was generally safe but some areas showed wear and tear, and regular agency staff made continuity of care more difficult.
The overall rating was Good, the same as at the previous inspection in 2017. However, Safe fell from Good to Requires Improvement. Effective and Well-led remained Good. Caring and Responsive were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe, and staff knew how to recognise and report abuse. Inspectors saw suitable equipment and safe moving and handling support.
“People told us they felt safe living at the home.” from the report
Enough staff on the visit
Inspectors saw people's needs being met promptly. Call bells were answered quickly and people did not wait long for meals.
“Our observations showed there were enough staff to keep people safe.” from the report
Effective healthcare support
The home worked with health professionals, and people received timely healthcare. Inspectors saw good outcomes for people receiving intermediate care.
“People were supported to receive timely access to healthcare services.” from the report
Kind, person-centred culture
Inspectors saw positive interactions and people described staff as caring. Staff were said to be attentive and approachable.
“The service had an open, inclusive and positive culture.” from the report
Medicines records and checks
needs fixingMedicine storage records were not always complete. Two eye-drop use-by dates were missing and two nurses' competency checks were overdue, although inspectors said medicines were given by trained staff and this did not appear to affect people.
“Minor improvements were needed to ensure arrangements to store medicines were consistently safe.” from the report
Reliance on agency staff
needs fixingThe home regularly used agency staff to maintain safe staffing levels. Some staff said this made continuity of care more difficult because agency staff did not know people as well.
“Some staff commented the use of agency staff impacted on the continuity of people's care as they did not know people as well as permanent staff.” from the report
Wear and tear
minorThe building was safe overall, but some parts were beginning to show wear. The manager said improvements were being considered.
“The building was safe and well-maintained overall, although some areas were beginning to show signs of wear and tear.” from the report
- 01What specific action was taken to ensure fridge temperatures and eye-drop use-by dates are recorded every time?
- 02Have all medicine competency checks been completed, and how does the home now identify overdue checks?
- 03How many agency nurses are usually working, and how are they helped to know each resident's needs?
- 04What written plans are in place to repair or improve the areas showing wear and tear, and when will these be reviewed?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led following concerns about care home visits; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 April 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 Northfield Nursing Home
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2022GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 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
90 live-in carers within about an hour of Sheffield
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 £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 76 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
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.