CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Paddock Stile Manor
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured about the home's infection prevention and control arrangements. This included visitors, PPE, testing, social distancing, cleaning, admissions and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control was safe.
The inspection took place on 29 January 2021. It was announced and targeted. The purpose was to check infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic.
There were 33 people living in the home, which could care for up to 40 people. Inspectors found visitor checks, regular COVID-19 testing, effective use of PPE and social distancing measures.
The home was clean, with frequent cleaning of areas people often touched. Inspectors were assured about infection control, including safe admissions, outbreak management and the infection control policy.
This was not a full inspection rating. The overall service and the Safe question were recorded as inspected but not rated.
Visitor infection checks
Visitors were checked to help prevent infections spreading into the home.
“Checks were carried out on visitors to prevent the spread of COVID-19.” from the report
PPE and staff training
Staff used PPE, and managers checked that it was being used correctly. Staff had training in infection prevention and control and PPE.
“Staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) and management staff checked they did this in the right way.” from the report
Testing and social distancing
People living in the home and staff were tested regularly. The home also used social distancing, zoning and cohorting measures.
“Regular testing in line with government guidelines for COVID-19 took place for people and the staff team.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was clean and touch points were cleaned frequently. The manager carried out audits to check cleanliness.
“The home looked clean and housekeeping staff made sure they frequently cleaned touch points, such as door handles and light switches.” from the report
Outbreak planning
Inspectors were assured that the home could manage infection outbreaks and that its infection prevention and control policy was up to date.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively managed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently checked to prevent infections entering or spreading in the home?
- 02How are staff supported and checked to use PPE correctly?
- 03How often are people living in the home and staff tested, and what happens after a positive result?
- 04How does the home manage social distancing, zoning and cohorting when there is an infection risk?
- 05How would the home manage an infection outbreak, and how would families be kept informed?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not provide ratings for the overall service or the other key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 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, July 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but medicine records and some safety arrangements needed improvement.
This was a planned, unannounced inspection on 17 and 18 June 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines records and records about how the home was managed.
The overall rating was Good. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were all rated Good. The home had improved since the previous inspection, including safer recruitment and better training for staff supporting people at mealtimes.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found medicine records were not always accurate, and one serious risk linked to recent seizures had not been assessed. They also saw that some people were left unattended when more individual support was needed.
The previous inspection was rated Requires Improvement and found two breaches of regulation. At this inspection, the provider had made improvements and was no longer in breach of regulations.
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff supported people's choices and independence.
“Staff treated people with kindness and respect.” from the report
Personalised care planning
Care plans recorded people's needs, preferences, routines, personal history and cultural or religious needs. They were regularly reviewed.
“Care plans contained detailed information about people's likes, dislikes, routines, personal history, cultural and religious needs.” from the report
Improvement since the last inspection
The home addressed the previous problems with staff checks and training for mealtime support. The previous two regulatory breaches were no longer present.
“At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home had regular contact with community nurses, chiropodists and GPs. Advice from health professionals was included in people's care plans.
“The service had developed positive relationships with local health care professionals.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could take part in activities, use the garden, attend church services and maintain links with the local community.
“People were supported to maintain their religious beliefs with church services taking place.” from the report
Medicine records
seriousRecords did not always show clearly whether people had received medicines as prescribed. Instructions for some medicines given when needed were also not detailed enough.
“Recording of medicines was not always accurate which meant it was difficult to see if people had received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Unassessed seizure risk
seriousOne person had recently experienced seizures, but the risk had not been identified and there was no care plan or risk assessment until the manager acted after inspectors raised it.
“We found one person had recently had seizures, the registered manager had failed to recognise this as a risk to the person and no care plan or risk assessment had been put in place.” from the report
People left unattended
needs fixingAt busy times, including mealtimes and when people were getting up, inspectors saw some people left without the individual support they needed. Managers said they would review staffing levels.
“During certain times of the day when people required more individual support for example at mealtimes and when people were getting up, we observed people were left unattended.” from the report
Inconsistent mealtime support
needs fixingOn the first inspection day, people who needed physical help or encouragement did not receive it consistently. The experience was better on the second day.
“On the first day people who needed physical support or verbal encouragement did not receive it constantly.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to make sure medicine records always show whether each dose was given?
- 02How are instructions for medicines given when needed recorded, including the symptoms to look for and when to offer them?
- 03What systems are now in place to identify and manage seizure risks or other newly emerging risks?
- 04How do you make sure enough staff are available to support people safely during mealtimes and when people are getting up?
- 05How are you monitoring the consistency of support at mealtimes since the inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; it followed a previous Requires Improvement rating and checked whether earlier improvements had been made. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 July 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 Paddock Stile Manor
4 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2017Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- March 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 April 2016.
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
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Sunderland
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 £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.