CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at St Georges Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, October 2023
St Georges Care Home Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care and safety systems, but staffing levels and the dementia environment needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 13 September 2023. Four inspectors spoke with people living in the home, a relative and staff. They also observed care and checked records, including care and management records.
People said they felt safe and that staff treated them well. Inspectors found suitable recruitment checks, risk assessments, infection control and medicines storage. However, staffing was sometimes difficult, with reliance on agency staff and delays in meeting some personal care needs.
The dementia floor was not well suited to people's needs. Rooms were not always easy to identify and there was limited meaningful activity. The home was rated Requires Improvement overall, with Safe and Well-led also rated Requires Improvement. This was a change from the previous overall rating of Good.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe and were treated well. Staff were described as kind and caring.
“People told us they felt safe and that staff treated them well.” from the report
Safeguarding and recruitment
Staff had training on recognising and reporting abuse. Recruitment included references and checks with the Disclosure and Barring Service.
“There were systems in place to check the suitability of staff in the recruitment process.” from the report
Risk management
The home used risk assessments for issues such as pressure damage and choking. Records showed people were supported with repositioning where needed.
“There were risk assessments in place to guide staff in how to support people safely.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements for preventing and managing infections, including the safe use of protective equipment.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Open about improvement work
The registered manager and provider acknowledged the problems and were sharing progress with inspectors and other organisations.
“The provider was actively engaging with stakeholders to listen to concerns and find solutions.” from the report
Staffing levels
seriousThe home was recruiting to cover 240 care hours and relied on agency nurses and other agency staff. Inspectors found that care could become task focused, and the staffing shortfall was a breach.
“There were insufficient numbers of staff deployed across the home.” from the report
Personalised care
needs fixingStaff said they often felt rushed. One person waited longer than they wanted for continence support, and inspectors saw a hungry person wait for a meal.
“At times, care became task focused rather than personalised.” from the report
Dementia environment
needs fixingThe dementia floor was not sufficiently adapted to people's needs. Rooms were not easy to identify and some repair and decoration work was needed.
“The floor was not decorated in a way that made individual rooms easily identifiable.” from the report
Meaningful activities
needs fixingInspectors found limited meaningful activity for people living with dementia and recommended further work on the environment.
“There was a lack of meaningful activity taking place for people living with dementia.” from the report
Communication with healthcare professionals
needs fixingHealthcare professionals and the safeguarding team had raised concerns that advice and requests were not always acted on. The home said it had addressed technical email problems and was monitoring the situation.
“requests and advice from health staff visiting the home weren't always being actioned.” from the report
- 01How many care hours are currently uncovered, and what is the timetable for filling the 240 hours identified in the report?
- 02How are you making sure people receive timely continence care and personalised support while recruitment is ongoing?
- 03What specific changes have been made to the dementia floor so people can identify their rooms and find suitable things to explore?
- 04How often are meaningful activities now provided for people living with dementia?
- 05How do you make sure advice from healthcare professionals is acted on, and how are mealtime positioning and choking risks checked?
This was a focused inspection prompted by concerns about clinical needs and looked mainly at Safe and Well-led; the other key question ratings were not inspected during this visit and were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 October 2023 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 found good infection control in several areas but concerns about distancing, storage and removing PPE.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 4 March 2021. It checked infection prevention and control because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes. The home was inspected but not rated overall.
Inspectors were assured about visitor checks, admissions, testing, cleaning, hygiene, PPE and the home's arrangements for preventing or managing outbreaks. Staff were also helping people keep in touch with relatives by telephone and video calls.
Inspectors were not assured that chairs in the dining room and lounge met social distancing guidance. They also found some bins were unsuitable, clean laundry and incontinence pads were stored on corridor trolleys, and some staff were unclear about the safe order for removing PPE.
The report says the home addressed the bin problem after the inspection and took action about staff PPE practice. The report does not give a rated judgement for Safe or the other four questions.
Visitor infection checks
Visitors had their temperatures checked, confirmed they had no symptoms, and were given PPE and hand hygiene facilities. People with a high temperature were not allowed into the home.
“Visitors were not let into the home if they were running a high temperature.” from the report
Cleaning and equipment
The home had extra cleaning for frequently touched areas and had the equipment and cleaning products inspectors considered necessary.
“There was additional cleaning in place including high touch areas such as door handles, light switches and handrails.” from the report
Testing and admissions
Staff had regular PCR and lateral flow testing. New admissions needed a negative PCR result and had to isolate for 14 days.
“When people were admitted from home or hospital, they had to have a negative PCR result and had to isolate in their room for a 14-day period.” from the report
Contact with relatives
Staff supported people to keep in touch with their families through telephone and video calls while visiting arrangements were restricted.
“At the time of the inspection the staff team were supporting people with telephone calls and video calls in order to keep in contact with their family.” from the report
Social distancing
needs fixingInspectors found that chairs in the dining room and lounge were not arranged to support the recommended two-metre distancing.
“We were not assured that the layout of the dining room and the lounge area was following social distancing guidelines.” from the report
Storage of clean items
needs fixingClean towels, flannels, bedsheets and incontinence pads were left on PPE trolleys in corridors. Inspectors said this could expose them to cross infection.
“This meant clean laundry and incontinence pads could be being exposed to the risk of cross infection due to being stored in this way.” from the report
Safe removal of PPE
needs fixingSome staff were unclear about the order for taking off PPE. The registered manager said action was taken after the inspection.
“For example, staff were unclear about what order to take off their PPE.” from the report
Waste bins
minorSome bins did not have lids or were not foot operated, and there was no clinical bin for visitors to dispose of used PPE. The report says the shortfall was addressed after the inspection.
“There was no clinical bin where visitors could dispose of their used personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
- 01How have you changed the layout of the dining room and lounge to meet social distancing guidance?
- 02How are clean towels, flannels, bedsheets and incontinence pads now stored to prevent cross infection?
- 03What training and checks now make sure staff remove PPE in the correct order?
- 04Have all visitor waste bins been replaced or adjusted, including a clinical bin for used PPE?
- 05How do visiting, testing and isolation arrangements work now for new admissions and existing residents?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices during the coronavirus outbreak; it was inspected but not rated and does not provide a full rating for the other key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 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 Georges Care Home
7 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- October 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2017Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2017Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: InadequateResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- September 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- July 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 July 2013.
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.