CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Queensway House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks were assessed and managed, there were enough staff, recruitment checks were completed and medicines were managed well.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, and worked with health professionals to meet people's needs. People received support with food, drinks, health monitoring and decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, patient and respectful. People were involved in decisions about their care, and their privacy, dignity and independence were supported.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and people had choices about how they were supported. The home offered activities, community links, ways to raise concerns and support for end-of-life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a person-centred culture and an approachable management team. Regular audits, meetings and staff development were used to monitor and improve care.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Rated Good across all five areas; inspectors found kind, personalised care, safe staffing and effective management.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 3 July 2019. One inspector spoke with four people, seven staff and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The inspectors found that people felt safe and were happy with the care. Staff were kind, respectful and knew people's needs well. There were enough staff, the home was clean, medicines were managed well and people's health needs were supported.
Care was personalised and records gave staff detailed guidance. People could make choices, join activities and raise concerns. The home was well managed, with audits and a focus on learning and improvement.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff supporting people with patience, warmth and attention to their individual needs. People said they were happy with the care.
“Staff supported people with patience, calmness and genuine warmth.” from the report
Safe staffing
There were enough staff, with no vacancies reported. Staff were visible and said they had time to support people without rushing.
“There were enough staff to meet the needs of the people living at the home.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. Staff knew people's preferences and responded to their choices.
“Care plans were very detailed and thorough, they contained individualised information to guide staff about how to support people effectively.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could take part in a wide range of activities and were supported to follow their interests, including activities outside the home.
“There was a wide variety of meaningful activities available and people were supported to follow their interests.” from the report
Good management oversight
The provider and managers used regular audits to check care quality and acted on areas needing improvement.
“The provider had an effective quality assurance system in place.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and review my relative's individual mental health and nursing needs?
- 02How do you make sure staffing remains stable and that there are enough staff when people's needs change?
- 03How are medicines, including medicines prescribed as required, monitored and reviewed?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative's interests and abilities?
- 05How would my relative and our family be involved in care reviews and raising concerns?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the ratings in all five areas remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 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.
What inspectors found, January 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found that earlier safety, care and management improvements had been made.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 16 December 2016. They spoke with people living at the home, staff, a relative and a health and social care professional. They observed care, checked five people's records and reviewed staffing, training, medicines and quality records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable risk assessments and staff who understood how to protect people from abuse.
People were treated with kindness and respect. They were supported to make choices, stay independent, eat food they preferred, access healthcare and take part in activities. Since the February 2016 inspection, the home had made the improvements required in safety, responsiveness, dignity and management.
Staff availability
Inspectors found staffing levels were safe and people said staff were available when they needed support. More staff time also allowed people to take part in activities and go out.
“Safe staffing levels were maintained to promote people's safety and to ensure people participated in activities of their choosing.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were given as prescribed and records were accurate. Written guidance was in place for medicines given only when needed.
“Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported their dignity, privacy, choices and independence. Inspectors saw positive and meaningful interactions.
“People were treated with kindness and respect and staff promoted people's independence, dignity and right to privacy.” from the report
Quality monitoring
Managers and the provider carried out regular checks on areas such as medicines, health and safety and care records. They acted when checks identified a problem.
“Effective systems were in place to regularly assess, monitor and improve the quality of care.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you make sure staffing levels remain safe at busy times and when staff are absent?
- 02How do you check that medicines records stay accurate, including medicines given only when needed?
- 03How are physical interventions recorded and reviewed after they happen?
- 04How will you respond if my relative loses weight or their health, behaviour or care needs change?
- 05How will my relative be supported to choose activities and take part in the community?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the home; the report says the previous rating in February 2016 was Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 January 2017 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 Queensway House
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- July 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 December 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 Staffordshire
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 £1,230 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.