CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Overslade House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and welcoming visiting arrangements.
This was a targeted inspection on 11 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected the home.
The inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed. This included the use of protective equipment, testing, cleaning, social distancing, safe admissions and outbreak planning.
Visitors said they felt welcome and that staff were caring. The home provided visiting pods, garden areas and other spaces for visits, while also encouraging visits in bedrooms and communal areas when possible.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infection risks and managing outbreaks. They also found that protective equipment and testing were being used safely.
“We were assured the provider was preventing visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
Relatives could visit regularly in line with government guidance. Visiting pods and garden areas supported safer visits, while indoor visits were encouraged when possible.
“The provider had built visiting pods and developed garden areas to encourage visitors to see their relatives in a safe environment where they could exercise social distancing.” from the report
Welcoming environment
Visitors described the home as welcoming and said staff were caring. The home also offered a coffee lounge with snacks and drinks for people and visitors.
“Visitors told us they felt welcome at the home, and that staff were caring.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What COVID-19-related staffing pressures are affecting the home now, and what measures are being used to manage them?
- 02Can relatives visit in bedrooms and communal areas, as well as using the visiting pods and gardens?
- 03How are protective equipment, testing and outbreak arrangements being managed now?
- 04How does the home make sure staff and visiting professionals meet the COVID-19 vaccination requirements or have a valid exemption?
- 05When was the home last fully assessed across all five CQC questions?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 February 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, July 2018
Overall Good, but Safe Requires Improvement; inspectors found unsafe moving practice, staffing pressures and an ongoing serious-incident investigation.
Inspectors visited on 2 and 3 July 2018. The first visit was unannounced and lasted into the evening, including the change to night staff. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers, observed care, and checked care plans, medicine records, recruitment files, audits and call-bell records.
The overall rating was Good. The home was rated Good for being well-led, meaning managers had systems to monitor care, responded to concerns and were seen as approachable.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Most risks had been assessed, medicines were generally available and given correctly, and staff had safeguarding training. However, inspectors saw unsafe practice when a person was moved using a hoist, found another person's falls risk had not been properly assessed, and noted some long call-bell waits and record problems.
The report says an external investigation into a serious incident from February 2018 was still ongoing. The provider had increased checks, used extra care hours, refreshed staff training and was recruiting an additional daytime nurse, but some risks were still not consistently identified.
Safeguarding awareness
Staff had refresher training and could explain how to recognise and report suspected abuse. Managers understood their responsibilities to alert the authorities.
“Staff spoken with could tell us what signs to be aware of that might indicate a person was at risk of abuse, and how they would report any concerns they had.” from the report
Medicines usually available
Inspectors found that the people whose records they checked had received their medicines as prescribed, apart from a missing record that was corrected during the visit.
“These people had all received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Management oversight
Managers introduced three daily checks, regular spot checks and reviews of care records after the serious incident. People, relatives and staff described managers as approachable.
“The management team had implemented increased quality assurance to monitor the quality of the service following a serious incident that had taken place in the home.” from the report
Information shared at handovers
Inspectors saw day and night staff sharing detailed information about people's health, behaviour, sleep, food and drink needs.
“This ensured staff coming on shift had up to date information about the people living in the home.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was described as clean and well maintained. Staff followed infection prevention steps when preparing injectable medicines.
“Relatives thought the home was well maintained and kept clean and free of any strong odours.” from the report
Unsafe hoist transfer
seriousInspectors observed staff using a wheelchair in an unsafe position while lowering a person from a hoist. This method had not been taught or risk assessed.
“On the second day of our inspection visit, our observations confirmed that staff were using unsafe practices when transferring one person using a hoist.” from the report
Unassessed falls risk
seriousOne person used a moving door handle to pull themselves up and had fallen the previous night. Staff had not assessed the risk or sought professional advice about safer support.
“There was no assessment of the risks posed by the manoeuvre used by this person to mobilise.” from the report
Staffing and call-bell delays
needs fixingDaytime nurses said they were very busy, and some people and relatives reported waiting for help. Most call bells were answered within five minutes, but some took up to 15 minutes.
“However, there were occasions when response times were over five minutes and up to 15 minutes.” from the report
Incomplete medicine record
needs fixingOne person's record for a blood-thinning medicine had not been started on time, although staff said the medicine had been given. The record was corrected during the inspection.
“However, one person did not have a MAR for the date commencing 3 July 2018 for their blood thinning medicine.” from the report
Damaged clinic worktop
minorA missing seal on a clinic-room worktop meant the surface could not be cleaned effectively. The manager said it would be repaired.
“This meant effective cleaning could not take place and there was a risk of cross infection.” from the report
- 01What has changed in the moving and handling procedure since inspectors saw the unsafe hoist transfer?
- 02How are risks such as falls and unsafe ways of getting out of bed now identified, recorded and reviewed?
- 03Has the additional daytime nurse been recruited, and what are the usual call-bell response times now?
- 04How do managers check that medicine administration records are completed on time?
- 05What is the current position of the external investigation into the serious incident?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other key-question ratings were not given in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 July 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 Overslade House
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- February 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 February 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Warwickshire
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 £950 to £1,260 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 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.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.