CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Saville Manor Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection prevention and control safely. This included visitors, personal protective equipment, testing, social distancing, cleaning and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection prevention and control arrangements during a targeted COVID-19 visit.
Inspectors visited the home on 22 October 2020. This was an announced, targeted inspection as part of the CQC's review of infection prevention and control in care homes.
They found measures for visitors, including protective equipment, health declarations and temperature checks. People were supported with hand washing and social distancing, and new admissions were isolated for 14 days.
The home carried out regular COVID-19 testing for staff and residents. Inspectors were assured that protective equipment, cleaning, testing, visiting arrangements and outbreak planning were being managed safely.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or a full rating across all five areas of care.
Visitor safety
Visitors were given protective equipment and had their health checked on arrival. They were guided to the visiting area using the shortest route.
“Staff greeted visitors at the entrance to the home and explained the safety procedures in place.” from the report
Contact with relatives
People were supported to keep in touch with loved ones by video and telephone. The home also arranged structured visits and activities.
“People had been supported to maintain contact with their loved ones, through video and phone calls.” from the report
Testing and admission arrangements
Staff were tested weekly and residents monthly. New residents had risk assessments and were isolated for 14 days.
“Regular testing for COVID-19 was being undertaken. Staff were tested weekly, and people using the service were tested monthly.” from the report
Clean environment and oversight
Inspectors found the home clean and free from clutter. Senior staff carried out checks, audits and supervision to monitor infection control practices.
“The home was clean and free from clutter.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visits currently arranged, and what protective measures are visitors expected to follow?
- 02How often are staff and residents currently tested for COVID-19 or other infections?
- 03How are new residents assessed and supported during any isolation period?
- 04What infection control checks and staff training are carried out now?
- 05Has the room dividing screen and intercom for visits been completed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas of care were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 November 2020 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, March 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 28 January 2020. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and a health professional. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, training, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives said they felt safe and spoke positively about the care. Inspectors found accurate monitoring records, safe medicines systems, suitable staffing, kind care and personalised care plans.
The rating improved from Requires Improvement. Earlier problems with records, equipment, topical creams, fluid thickeners and quality checks had been addressed. The report says the legal requirements were met at this inspection.
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored, given and recorded safely. The home had introduced an electronic recording system and was trying to give one person's medicines openly rather than covertly.
“People received their medicines safely and when they needed them.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff speaking kindly with people and respecting their privacy. People and relatives spoke positively about how staff treated them.
“People were treated with respect and dignity, and their privacy was maintained.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and choices. They were reviewed regularly, including when people's conditions changed.
“Care records were personalised, up to date and regularly reviewed to make sure they still reflected people's current needs.” from the report
Good leadership and improvement
Managers used regular audits and action plans to check the quality of care. Inspectors found that earlier weaknesses had been addressed.
“At this inspection we found sufficient improvements had been made and the legal requirements were met.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People were supported with food and fluids, including special diets. The home arranged access to healthcare professionals and regular GP visits.
“People received a healthy and nutritious diet, and were provided with the support they needed to eat and drink.” from the report
Some people felt bored
minorMost people spoke positively about activities, but some said they were sometimes bored. The activities coordinator was working to improve one-to-one support for people spending time in their rooms.
“Some people had commented they were sometimes, 'bored.'” from the report
- 01How are medicines records checked now that the electronic recording system has been introduced?
- 02How do you support people who spend time in their rooms to avoid becoming socially isolated or bored?
- 03What activities are available for someone who prefers one-to-one support rather than group activities?
- 04How are care records, food and fluid charts, medicines and equipment checks audited, and how quickly are problems corrected?
- 05How would you support someone whose medicines are being given covertly, and how would you review whether this remains necessary?
This inspection looked at all five key questions and rated each one Good; the previous focused inspection had examined Safe and Well-led only. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 March 2020 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 Saville Manor Nursing Home
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Bristol, City of
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 £1,020 to £1,300 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She became a good friend to my mother in law, chatting with her, dancing with her, knitting with her and the list goes on”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.