CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at St Andrews House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infections, using protective equipment safely, supporting testing and following social distancing and hygiene procedures.
- 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, December 2020
St Andrews House was inspected but not rated; inspectors found clear infection control, good cleanliness and kind interactions.
The CQC carried out an announced, targeted inspection on 27 November 2020. It checked infection prevention and control because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes. There were 23 people living in the home.
Inspectors found that staff followed infection control procedures. Staff had training in protective equipment, handwashing and testing. They saw suitable protective equipment being used, with plentiful supplies available. The home was clean and had detailed cleaning schedules.
People could keep in touch with relatives through window visits, technology and telephone calls. Inspectors saw a settled atmosphere and positive interactions between people and staff. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Infection control
Staff had training in infection control, protective equipment and handwashing. Inspectors saw staff using suitable protective equipment and found plentiful supplies.
“Infection prevention and control (IPC) procedures were clear and followed by staff.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found good cleanliness in the areas they saw. Housekeeping staff followed detailed cleaning schedules.
“There was a good standard of cleanliness in all areas seen.” from the report
Family contact
The home supported contact with relatives through window visits, technology and telephone calls. It also had a warm and safe area ready for visits when restrictions eased.
“People were supported to maintain contact with their relatives in different ways including window visits, using technology and by telephone.” from the report
Settled atmosphere
Inspectors saw positive interactions between people and staff. People appeared settled and were supported to spend time in ways they chose.
“The atmosphere in the home was settled and we observed good interactions between people in the home and staff.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are infection prevention and control procedures being followed now?
- 02How often are infection prevention and control policies and audits reviewed?
- 03How are relatives able to visit or keep in touch with people living in the home now?
- 04How are new residents admitted safely and tested for infections?
- 05How do you make sure staff have enough protective equipment and up-to-date training?
This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; the home was inspected but not rated and the other care questions were not assessed in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 December 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 kind, safe and personalised care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 18 February 2020. The inspector and an expert by experience spoke with people living at the home, visitors, staff and managers. They observed care, toured the building and checked care plans, medicines, staff records, complaints and other documents.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and were happy. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, kind relationships, personalised care, activities and systems for managing quality.
The previous inspection had rated the home Requires Improvement and found a breach about staff recruitment. Inspectors found that improvements had been made and the home was no longer in breach. They still asked the home to improve hand hygiene at mealtimes, the mealtime setting and some communication and feedback processes.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff administering medicines were trained and their competence had been checked.
“People received their medicines when they needed them from staff who had been trained and had their competency checked.” from the report
Kind relationships
People described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw warmth, friendly conversations and respectful relationships.
“We observed appropriate humour and warmth from staff towards people; conversations were friendly and there was a lot of banter and laughter.” from the report
Personalised care
Staff knew people's needs, routines and preferences. Care plans were reviewed and updated when needs changed.
“People's care and support was centred around their choices and preferences.” from the report
Improvement since the last inspection
The home had addressed the previous recruitment problem and was no longer in breach of regulations. Inspectors found clear evidence that improvements had taken place.
“At this inspection, we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.” from the report
Hand hygiene at mealtimes
needs fixingInspectors found the home was clean but said staff needed to follow hand hygiene practices more consistently, particularly when helping people at mealtimes.
“We discussed the need for staff to follow more regular hand hygiene practices, particularly when supporting people at mealtimes.” from the report
Mealtime presentation
minorPeople had choices of meals, snacks and drinks, but inspectors discussed improving the mealtime experience, including napkins and table settings.
“We discussed how the mealtime experience could be improved for example in the provision of napkins and table settings.” from the report
Feedback and information systems
needs fixingSome important information had not been returned to local commissioners on time. Residents' meetings had also not been held for some time, although the manager said people's views were gathered informally.
“We noted residents' meetings had not been held for some time; the registered manager told us people's views were sought informally but assured us this would be considered.” from the report
- 01What steps have been taken to make hand hygiene consistent when staff support people at mealtimes?
- 02What changes have been made to napkins, table settings and the overall mealtime experience?
- 03Have residents' meetings restarted, and how are residents' views recorded and acted on?
- 04How do you make sure important information is returned to local commissioners by the due date?
- 05How have you maintained the improvements to staff recruitment checks since the previous inspection?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the report says the CQC looked at both the care provided and the premises. 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 St Andrews House
5 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2017Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- August 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 January 2011.
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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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 £1,260 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.