CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Richmond Village Aston On Trent Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, January 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection-control arrangements and safe staffing during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 13 January 2022. Inspectors checked infection prevention and control, and asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
Inspectors found safe staffing levels, staff training in infection control and personal protective equipment, and regular checks of staff competency. They were assured that visitors, admissions, testing, protective equipment and infection outbreaks were managed safely.
The home had cleaning schedules, dedicated cleaning staff and regularly reviewed COVID-19 policies. People had care plans and risk assessments about visits and going out during the pandemic.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report gives findings about infection control rather than a full rating of the home's overall quality.
Safe staffing and training
Staffing levels were maintained. Staff had infection-control and protective-equipment training, with refresher training and competency checks.
“Safe staffing levels were maintained at the service. All staff had completed training in relation to infection prevention and control (IPC)” from the report
Safe visiting
The home had systems for checking visitors and helping them follow its infection-control procedures.
“Robust systems were in place to ensure safe visiting, including checking vaccination status of professionals attending the service” from the report
Cleaning arrangements
Cleaning was scheduled and audited. Dedicated cleaning staff worked on each floor, with frequent cleaning of high-touch areas.
“High touch areas were cleaned at least 4 times every 24 hours with appropriate cleaning products.” from the report
Individual plans
People had individual care plans and risk assessments covering their choices about visitors and going out during the pandemic.
“People had individualised care plans and risk assessments detailing their choices about receiving visitors and going out during the pandemic.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are staffing levels and COVID-19-related staffing pressures being managed now?
- 02How are visitors' vaccination status and infection-control understanding checked today?
- 03How often are high-touch areas cleaned, and how is this checked?
- 04How are people's choices about visits and going out recorded and reviewed?
- 05When was the home's last full inspection covering Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the home was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 January 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, December 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found caring regular staff and good activities, but safety, staffing and management systems were not reliable enough.
This was an unannounced inspection on 10 October 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and a visiting professional. They reviewed care records, medicines records, falls information and management records.
The home had improved some risk and medicine systems, but important problems remained. Risks were not always recorded or shared properly. There were not always enough experienced staff, especially on one floor. This affected people's safety, dignity and the consistency of their care.
People generally received personalised care from regular staff who knew them well. Activities, communication support, food and end of life planning were positive. The home was rated Good for being responsive, but Requires Improvement for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led.
The home had a new management team, but improvements were not yet firmly established. The overall rating remained Requires Improvement for the second inspection in a row, and the provider was still in breach of regulations.
Regular staff knew people
Regular staff understood people's preferences and could describe the support they needed. Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed.
“People were supported by staff who knew them well and understood their preferences.” from the report
Activities and independence
People had group and individual activities, including access to facilities in the wider village. Some people were supported to remain independent and involved in village life.
“There were lots of opportunities for people to engage them in meaningful activities, including through working with other organisations.” from the report
Food and specialist diets
People had choices of meals, their weight was monitored and special diets were provided. Food for people at risk of choking was presented in a way intended to encourage eating.
“Special diets were catered for and this included softened or puree food for people who were at risk of choking.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic. Cleaning, protective equipment and regular reviews were in place to reduce infection risks.
“The home continued to be clean and hygienic which reduced the risk of infection.” from the report
Good responsive care
People's communication needs were assessed and information was provided using pictures and symbols where needed. End of life wishes were discussed and recorded.
“People's communication needs were assessed, and it was clear how information should be shared with them.” from the report
Risks were not always managed
seriousSome risks were not fully assessed or shared with staff. Inspectors found that a person was exposed to possible harm because important skin-care information was not easily available.
“This meant the person was exposed to harm because information about how to protect them was not shared effectively.” from the report
Staffing and temporary staff
seriousThere were not always enough experienced staff on one floor. People and relatives said temporary staff did not always know people's needs, and inspectors saw people without staff support.
“There were not always sufficient experienced staff deployed to meet people's needs safely and to uphold their dignity.” from the report
Dignity and comfort
needs fixingPeople were not always given focused support at mealtimes or comfort when distressed. Staff shortages made it harder to provide person-centred care.
“People did not always have their dignity upheld.” from the report
Capacity decisions
needs fixingCapacity assessments and best-interest decisions were not always recorded when people could not make particular decisions themselves.
“However, when people were not able to make their own decisions there were not always capacity assessments for this or to show how best interest decisions had been made.” from the report
Weak management records
seriousThe manager could not locate records for some medicines errors and falls. This meant inspectors could not be assured that systems to protect people from harm were being followed.
“When we tried to review these incidents, the manager was unable to locate records about some of them.” from the report
- 01How many permanent and temporary staff are now normally deployed on each floor, and how do you check this matches people's needs?
- 02How do you make sure temporary staff know each person's risks, preferences and dementia support needs before providing care?
- 03What system now records accidents, medicine errors and falls, and how do you show that lessons have been acted on?
- 04How are important decisions from clinical meetings added to care plans and shared with all relevant staff?
- 05How do you complete and record capacity assessments and best-interest decisions for people who cannot make particular decisions themselves?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions; the report says Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led remained Requires Improvement, while Responsive remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 December 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 Richmond Village Aston On Trent Care Home
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- January 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Richmond Village Aston On Trent Care Home →
- December 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Richmond Village Aston On Trent Care Home →
- October 2018Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 September 2017.
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
62 live-in carers within about an hour of Derbyshire
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 £1,010 to £1,260 a week. 51 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
“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.