CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at St Andrews Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments, effective medicines management and appropriate infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this inspection. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this inspection. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating, although inspectors observed kind and compassionate care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this inspection. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear management oversight, a positive person-centred culture and systems for reviewing incidents and making improvements.
What inspectors found, August 2022
St Andrews Nursing Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind care and good management, with some issues still being monitored.
This was an unannounced inspection on 29 July, 2 August and 9 August 2022. One inspector spoke with seven people using the home, staff and four relatives. They also observed care and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. People said they felt safe, staff were kind, medicines were managed properly and risks were understood. Inspectors also found enough staff and safe recruitment systems.
The inspection only assessed Safe and Well-led. The other three areas were not inspected this time, so their previous ratings were used in the overall rating. The home had also suspended nursing care in November 2021 and was providing residential care only.
Kind and compassionate care
People described staff positively and inspectors saw care delivered in a kind and compassionate way.
“We observed staff interact with people in a kind and compassionate manner.” from the report
Safe staffing and recruitment
The provider reviewed people's dependency levels and inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks were also described as safe.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs. The provider regularly reviewed dependency levels to check the staffing levels continued to meet people's needs.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Inspectors found that medicines were received, stored, given and disposed of safely. There were clear instructions for medicines given only when needed.
“People's medicines were appropriately managed. Medicines were safely received, stored, administered and destroyed.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The home analysed accidents and incidents for patterns and used them to help improve care.
“Records were analysed for patterns or trends and incidents were used as a learning opportunity.” from the report
Active management
The manager reviewed the service, used action plans and worked with staff to introduce a new electronic record system.
“The registered manager and staff had worked diligently to ensure this was implemented effectively.” from the report
Patchy internet connection
minorInternet access became worse in parts of the home. The provider was looking at other solutions because earlier steps had not worked.
“The level of internet connectivity was patchy and deteriorated the further away from the centre of the home people and staff went.” from the report
One staff member in some units at times
minorThe staffing calculation meant one staff member could be present in a unit at times. The provider was monitoring this and said staffing could be increased if needed.
“The dependency calculation led to one member of staff, at times, would be present in the units.” from the report
Care records being updated
minorThe manager was still working to make sure all care records were accurate and up to date.
“The registered manager regularly reviewed the care records and was in the process of ensuring all were accurate and up to date.” from the report
- 01How many staff will be available in the unit where my relative would live, including at times when the dependency calculation provides for one staff member?
- 02What alternative solution has been found, or is planned, for the patchy internet connection in parts of the home?
- 03How will you check that my relative's electronic care records remain accurate and up to date?
- 04What care can you provide now that nursing care was suspended in November 2021?
- 05How will you increase staffing if my relative's needs change?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; the other ratings were carried over from the last comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 August 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, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection risks, visiting and admissions were being managed safely.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 16 March 2021. It was carried out during the coronavirus pandemic to check infection prevention and control measures.
The inspectors were assured that the home managed visitors, social distancing, admissions, personal protective equipment and testing safely. They also found an up-to-date infection control policy and arrangements to prevent or manage outbreaks.
The home had a visiting pod, regular COVID-19 testing and activities for people, including group activities within a bubble. This inspection did not give a quality rating. Safe was recorded as inspected but not rated.
Safe visiting
The home had screening and testing for visitors, social distancing measures and a purpose-built visiting pod to help people communicate.
“Systems were in place to allow safe visiting, including screening and testing visitors to reduce any potential infection risk, before they entered the building.” from the report
Infection control
Staff wore protective equipment correctly. Infection control training had taken place and the home had an infection control lead.
“Staff wore PPE correctly. Training in infection prevention and control measures and the appropriate use of PPE had taken place.” from the report
Testing and admissions
There was regular COVID-19 testing for people and staff. The inspectors also found systems to admit people safely.
“A regular programme of COVID-19 testing was in place for people and the staff team.” from the report
Activities and family contact
People were supported to take part in individual and group activities and to keep in touch with relatives through social media.
“There was a robust activities programme and people were engaged in a variety of solo and group activities.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors screened and tested now, and how are visiting arrangements managed?
- 02How often are people using the home and staff tested, and what happens if a test result is positive?
- 03How do you check that staff use personal protective equipment correctly?
- 04How are new admissions tested and risk assessed before entering the home?
- 05What activities and ways of keeping in touch with relatives are available now?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 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.
Every inspection of St Andrews Nursing Home
6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2015Goodstayed GoodEffective: Good
- August 2015Goodstayed GoodEffective: Good
- February 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
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 £960 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.