CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at OLIVE ROW CARE HOME
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2024
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found people were at risk of harm because care, records and management systems were not reliable.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 1 February 2024. Inspectors looked at concerns about management, staff skills, pressure ulcers, wound care, infection control, personal care and recognising changes in health. They spoke with 15 people, 2 relatives and 5 staff, and reviewed care records, incident records, training and other documents.
Inspectors found people were at risk of harm. Staff did not always recognise or report abuse and unexplained injuries. Staff did not always have the skills to provide or record care, and risk information and incident records were incomplete.
The home did not have a registered manager. Its systems did not reliably identify unmet needs, missing records, unreported incidents or when people needed referral to other health professionals. An area manager and trainer had been placed in the home to start training, review records and improve oversight.
The service was inspected but not rated. The previous rating was Good, published on 27 June 2023, but this targeted inspection did not review the whole of any key question, so it did not change that rating.
Clean environment
Inspectors found that the home appeared clean and that staff carried out regular cleaning.
“The home appeared clean and staff were employed to carry out regular cleaning.” from the report
Improvement work started
The provider had placed an area manager and trainer in the home. Staff had started receiving supervision and training to improve their skills.
“Staff had begun to receive one to one supervision and training to improve their skills and check their competency.” from the report
Unrecognised injuries and abuse
seriousStaff did not always recognise or report abuse and unexplained injuries. Inspectors raised two safeguarding alerts.
“Staff failed to report unexplained injuries and management failed to report all allegations of abuse to the relevant authorities.” from the report
Staff competency
seriousStaff did not always have the skills, experience or knowledge to meet people's needs or record the care they had given.
“People were not always receiving care that met their needs as staff did not always know how to carry out all personal care or know how to record the care they had given.” from the report
Incomplete risk and care records
seriousRisk assessments had been completed, but important risk information was missing from some care plans. This meant staff might not have had the information needed to provide care safely.
“People's risks had been assessed, but not all information about risks had been included in care plans.” from the report
Weak quality oversight
seriousThe provider's systems did not reliably identify poor care, incomplete records or incidents that had not been reported or followed up. The home also lacked systems to identify when people needed other health professionals.
“The provider failed to have systems and process in place to identify people were not always receiving care that met their needs, records were incomplete or that incidents had not been reported or followed up.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThere was a manager in post, but no registered manager had been appointed at the time of the inspection.
“At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01What action has been completed since the inspection to make sure staff can provide and record all required personal care?
- 02How are unexplained injuries and safeguarding concerns now recognised, recorded and reported to the relevant authorities?
- 03How have care plans and risk assessments been reviewed to make sure staff have complete information about people's risks?
- 04How are incidents now recorded, investigated and followed up?
- 05Who is currently responsible for managing the home, and what progress has been made towards having a registered manager?
This was a targeted inspection of specific concerns within Safe and Well-led; it did not assess the whole of any key question, and the other ratings were not reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 2024 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, June 2023
OLIVE ROW CARE HOME rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care, but some improvements were still being embedded.
This was a focused inspection after concerns about the number of safeguarding incidents. Inspectors visited on 3 May 2023 without notice and again on 26 May 2023 with notice. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines, staffing, training and management systems.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staffing levels had been revised, people said they felt safe, and staff were described as kind and respectful. The home also worked with health and social care professionals and had improvement plans in place.
Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from the safeguarding concern that prompted the inspection. However, the registered manager was absent and interim arrangements were in place. Some improvements, including accurate records and infection control practice, had started but still needed time to become established.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe, and staff knew how to recognise and report abuse.
“People and family members told us they felt safe and staff treated them with respect and dignity.” from the report
Staffing and response
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. They saw staff respond quickly to call bells and spend time with people.
“We observed staff responded quickly to calls bells and spent time with people to help meet their social and emotional needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Feedback from people showed that staff treated them with kindness, compassion and respect.
“We received positive feedback from people using the service that demonstrated staff treated people with kindness and compassion.” from the report
Improvement work
The provider used feedback and worked with outside organisations to identify areas for improvement. Inspectors saw evidence that some actions were already having a positive effect.
“The provider engaged with external stakeholders and action plans were in place, which identified key areas for improvement” from the report
Interim management
needs fixingThe registered manager was absent during the inspection, so the area manager and two deputy managers were providing interim management. Improvement work was under way but had not yet fully settled into everyday practice.
“In the absence of the registered manager interim management of the service was provided by the area manager, and two deputy managers.” from the report
Electronic care records
minorThe electronic monitoring system sometimes took time to upload information because of poor internet connections. The home had brought back paper charts to help keep records complete.
“At times, the service experienced delays in the system uploading the information, due to poor internet connections.” from the report
- 01Who is currently responsible for the home while the registered manager is absent, and how can relatives contact them?
- 02What action has been taken in response to the safeguarding incidents that prompted this inspection?
- 03How do you make sure repositioning, food and fluid records stay complete when the electronic monitoring system is delayed?
- 04Which improvement actions are still outstanding, and how will you show that they have become routine practice?
- 05What changes to staffing rotas have been made, and are current staffing levels still enough for people's needs?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 June 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.
Every inspection of OLIVE ROW CARE HOME
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2024Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- June 2023Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2022GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 May 2021.
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
89 live-in carers within about an hour of North Northamptonshire
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. 76 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.”
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.