CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Snowdrop House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 arrangements but weaknesses in PPE use, distancing and cleaning processes.
This was a targeted inspection on 16 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, rather than reviewing all aspects of care.
Inspectors found several good arrangements. The home was clean, visitor checks and testing were in place, COVID-19 information was displayed, and staff had received infection control and PPE training.
However, inspectors were not fully assured about some safety measures. Staff did not always follow PPE and infection control guidance. Furniture in one lounge did not support social distancing, and cleaning schedules did not ensure higher-risk areas were cleaned last.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not provide an overall Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating.
Cleanliness
Inspectors found the home clean, with cleaning taking place during the visit.
“The home was clean and there was cleaning ongoing during our visit.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors were screened, tested and given infection control instructions before entering.
“Visitors were screened and had their temperatures checked on arrival.” from the report
Staff training
Staff had training in PPE, infection control and COVID-19, and said they felt supported.
“Staff had received training on putting on and taking off personal protective equipment (PPE), infection control and COVID-19.” from the report
Clear information
The home displayed accessible information about COVID-19 and had policies and risk assessments for managing the pandemic.
“Information was displayed about COVID-19 giving clear and accessible advice.” from the report
PPE was not always used correctly
seriousInspectors were not assured that staff always followed the correct PPE procedures, despite having received training.
“We were not assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Staff did not always follow infection control guidance
needs fixingInspectors were only somewhat assured that people were admitted safely because staff did not always follow infection prevention guidance.
“Staff did not always follow infection prevention control guidelines.” from the report
Communal lounge layout
needs fixingFurniture in one communal lounge did not meet good practice or social distancing guidance.
“The arrangement of furniture in one communal lounge did not follow good practice and social distancing guidelines.” from the report
Cleaning schedules
needs fixingCleaning schedules were not managed so that higher-risk areas were cleaned last, which could have reduced the risk of infection spreading.
“Cleaning schedules had not been managed to enable higher risk areas to be attended to last in order to further help prevent transmission.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to ensure staff always put on and remove PPE safely?
- 02How do you check that staff follow infection prevention and control guidance when people are admitted?
- 03How is the communal lounge now arranged to support social distancing?
- 04How are cleaning schedules organised so higher-risk areas are cleaned at the appropriate time?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it was not a full inspection of all aspects of care and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 April 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, August 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, kind care but end of life planning, complaints handling and management oversight were not always good enough.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 2 July 2019. One inspector and two experts by experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also observed care and checked care, medicines, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Caring. People were treated kindly and respectfully. Medicines, infection control, risk assessments and staff recruitment were generally managed safely. People received training, support and help to make choices about their care.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Responsive and Well-led. Care plans did not contain enough detail, especially for end of life care. Some people felt complaints were not properly answered. Audits had not found these problems. The overall rating remained Requires Improvement for the second inspection in a row.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness and dignity. The atmosphere was calm, and staff knew people's preferences and interests.
“People were treated with respect and kindness. Staff spoke with people in a courteous and dignified manner.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were administered, stored and recorded safely. Staff explained medicines calmly and took time to support people.
“People's medicines were administered, stored and recorded safely.” from the report
Training and support
Staff received an induction, regular role-specific training and supervision. Staff said they felt supported and could ask for more training.
“Staff received an induction when starting at the service. Regular training, specific to their role, was delivered and refreshed when needed.” from the report
Activities and social life
People said they enjoyed the activities and had enough to do. There were also opportunities to go out and suggest activities.
“People told us that they enjoyed the activities provided. People told us that they had enough to do and were happy living at the service.” from the report
End of life plans lacked detail
seriousThe end of life care plans inspected did not explain clearly what staff should do to keep people comfortable and pain free. Health professionals had also raised concerns about end of life care.
“There was no information about the actions needed by staff to keep the person comfortable and pain free.” from the report
Care plans were not personal enough
needs fixingCare plans recorded the main areas of support but did not always explain how people wanted care to be provided. This could make care less consistent between staff.
“Peoples' care plans included key areas where support was needed however, lacked the finer detail to help staff provide consistent care.” from the report
Complaints were not always followed up
needs fixingSome people said their complaints did not lead to change and they were not told what action had been taken. The manager said they would look at better ways to provide feedback.
“People told us they felt their complaints were not always responded to appropriately and they did not always receive feedback about what actions had been taken in response to the issues they raised.” from the report
Audits missed important gaps
needs fixingThe home's checks had not identified the missing detail in care plans. This meant the quality system had not properly identified or corrected an issue affecting consistent care.
“However, the audits undertaken of people's care plans had failed to identify the lack of person-centred detail to support staff to provide consistent care.” from the report
- 01How have you improved end of life care plans so they clearly explain how each person should be kept comfortable and pain free?
- 02How do you make sure care plans describe each person's detailed preferences, including personal care such as bathing, showering and shaving?
- 03How will you record complaints, explain the action taken and give feedback to the person and their family?
- 04How do you check that audits identify missing or unclear information in care plans?
- 05Have the permanent nursing staff joined the home, and how do you ensure agency nurses have the experience and skills needed for complex and end of life care?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with care, premises, records, staff and management systems examined. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 August 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 Snowdrop House
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2018Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Hertfordshire
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 £1,300 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.