CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at St Clements Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments and safe medicines management. Equipment, premises and infection control were also checked and found to be managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and people's health, nutrition and care needs were assessed. Staff sought consent and followed best-interest processes where people lacked capacity to make particular decisions.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and respectful, promoted privacy and dignity, and supported people to remain independent. Families could visit without undue restriction and were involved when needed.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's preferences and staff knew how people wanted to be supported. Activities had reduced after the activities coordinator left, although an interim arrangement was being developed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and staff were described as approachable, supportive and focused on improvement. Audits, feedback and incident reviews were used to monitor and improve care.
What inspectors found, March 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but activities had reduced while a replacement coordinator was being recruited.
This was an unannounced inspection on 12 February 2019. An inspector and an expert by experience spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care records, medicines, staffing, incidents and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines systems, suitable care plans and kind support that respected people's dignity, choices and independence.
People's health needs were monitored and staff worked with health professionals. Complaints and feedback were managed, and the management team used audits and incidents to improve the service.
The main shortfall was that activities had reduced after the activities coordinator left. Recruitment was still under way, and the manager was arranging an interim approach.
Enough trained staff
People and relatives said staffing was sufficient, and inspectors saw staff respond promptly. Rotas showed that trained staff were consistently on duty.
“We compared the staff rota with information about staff training and found that sufficient numbers of trained staff were consistently on duty.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff built warm relationships, respected people's dignity and used people's preferred names. They also supported privacy during personal care and transfers.
“We witnessed many positive interactions between staff and people they supported which were warm and friendly.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, interests and life histories. Staff could explain how they supported people in the way they preferred.
“Staff we spoke with could describe in detail the steps they took to support people, their preferences, life histories and how they liked to receive their care.” from the report
Health and end-of-life support
Staff monitored health needs, contacted health professionals when needed and had training in palliative care. People could remain in familiar surroundings at the end of life.
“People were supported to remain at the service, in familiar surroundings, supported by staff who knew them well.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff described the manager as approachable. The home used audits, meetings, suggestions and feedback to identify improvements.
“The management team positively encouraged feedback, reviewed the quality of the service and acted on any identified shortfalls to continuously improve the service.” from the report
Reduced activities
minorPeople told inspectors there had been fewer activities since the activities coordinator left. Recruitment had taken longer than expected, so the manager was arranging an interim plan.
“People told us that since they had left, there had been a reduction in activities on offer.” from the report
- 01What activities are available now, and has a replacement activities coordinator been appointed?
- 02How do you make sure there are enough trained staff on every shift?
- 03How will you involve my relative and our family in updating their care plan and preferences?
- 04How do you monitor changes in my relative's health and arrange appointments with health professionals?
- 05How are medicines, incidents and care quality checked, and how will concerns be shared with us?
This was an unannounced scheduled inspection that looked at the premises and care across all five CQC questions, with observations, discussions and records checks. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 March 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 St Clements Nursing Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 March 2012.
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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
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 £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
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.