CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at St Georges Court Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, September 2023
Rated Inadequate and placed in special measures; inspectors found serious risks in safety, staffing, care records and management.
This was an unannounced inspection. Inspectors visited on 28 June and 11 July 2023, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines, training, recruitment and quality checks.
The home was not consistently safe. Risks were not always assessed or recorded properly. Medicines and medical devices were not always managed safely. Inspectors also found concerns about safeguarding, staffing skills, infection control, dignity and basic personal care.
The home was rated Inadequate overall. Safe and well-led were Inadequate. Effective, caring and responsive were rated Requires Improvement. The home was placed in special measures, so CQC will monitor it and normally re-inspect within six months.
Safe recruitment checks
The provider carried out recruitment checks, including DBS checks, to help ensure staff were suitable to work with people.
“The provider undertook specific checks when recruiting staff. These checks helped ensure staff were suitable to work with the people they supported.” from the report
Some kind interactions
Although inspectors saw missed opportunities to engage with people, they also observed staff being respectful, kind and considerate.
“However, we also saw many positive staff interactions which were respectful, kind, and considerate.” from the report
Food was generally well received
Most people and relatives spoken with were positive about the food, and staff supported people in the main to eat and drink enough.
“A relative confirmed, "The food is cooked on site with fresh ingredients; there is always a choice of menus and plenty of snacks on demand.” from the report
Contact with health professionals
The home involved health professionals such as GPs and speech and language therapists in people's care.
“The registered manager and staff team worked with external professionals such as GP's, chiropodist and speech and language therapists.” from the report
People were at risk of harm
seriousSafeguarding procedures were not always followed. Inspectors found unexplained bruising, missed monitoring after a fall and poor learning from incidents.
“During this inspection, we raised multiple concerns with the local authority safeguarding team around neglect, poor care, and harm.” from the report
Care records and risk assessments were unsafe
seriousRecords were sometimes inaccurate, incomplete or not updated after people's needs changed. This included choking risks, medical devices and wound care.
“The provider did not make sure people's known risks were documented in detail to guide staff on how to nurse and care for people safely.” from the report
Medicines were not always managed safely
seriousStock records were inaccurate and staff were slow to act on medicine changes. Inspectors also found weaknesses in medicine storage and key control.
“Medicines were not always managed safely. Medicines stock tallies were not always accurate.” from the report
Staff skills and staffing levels
seriousThere were not enough skilled, experienced and competent staff to ensure safety. Inspectors found gaps in dementia, nursing and safeguarding knowledge.
“There were not enough skilled, experienced, and competent staff to ensure people's safety.” from the report
Dignity and basic care
seriousPeople were not always treated with dignity. Inspectors saw personal care being given with a door wide open and found concerns about nail care, oral care and missing clothes.
“Staff did not always respect and promote people's dignity.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousThe home's audits and governance systems did not identify several serious problems. This meant action was not taken quickly enough to improve care.
“Governance and quality checks were not always effective in identifying areas for improvement.” from the report
- 01What has changed to make sure risk assessments are updated promptly after hospital discharges or changes in people's needs?
- 02How are you checking that staff can safely support people with complex dementia, nursing needs, safeguarding and pressure-area risks?
- 03What checks now ensure medicines are received, recorded, stored and changed promptly and safely?
- 04How are you making sure people receive regular oral care, nail care, baths where requested and meaningful activities?
- 05What evidence can you show that incidents, falls, safeguarding concerns and complaints are now recorded, investigated and acted on properly?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, with visits on 28 June and 11 July 2023; infection prevention and control was also reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 September 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, March 2021
St Georges Court Care Home was inspected but not rated; infection controls were largely assured, with limited natural ventilation noted.
Inspectors carried out an unannounced targeted inspection on 4 February 2021. It focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than all aspects of care.
The home had systems for visitor checks, safe admissions, personal protective equipment, COVID-19 testing, cleaning and managing outbreaks. Inspectors were assured about most of these arrangements.
Inspectors were only somewhat assured about the building's layout and hygiene practices because very few windows were open for natural ventilation. The manager said windows were opened at times during each day.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not provide a full overall rating or ratings for all five areas of care.
Visitor safety
Visits were scheduled, visitor access was limited and visitors were escorted to help reduce infection risks.
“Staff made sure that people were protected against the transmission of infection from visitors by scheduling visits, limiting areas that visitors could access and being available to escort visitors.” from the report
Protective equipment and testing
Staff had enough protective equipment and regular COVID-19 testing was carried out for people living in the home and staff.
“Staff had enough personal protective equipment, such as masks, gloves and aprons, and had supported people so that they also understood the need for this.” from the report
Cleaning
The home was clean and cleaning of frequently touched surfaces had been increased.
“The home was clean and staff had increased cleaning of frequently touched surfaces to reduce the risk of transmission of infection.” from the report
Infection control planning
The home had specific COVID-19 policies and plans to guide staff in reducing the risk of infection spreading.
“There was COVID-19 specific policies and plans, which meant staff were guided to take appropriate actions to reduce the risk of transmission.” from the report
Natural ventilation
needs fixingInspectors found that very few windows were open to provide natural ventilation. The manager said windows were opened at times during each day.
“However, there were very few windows open to provide natural ventilation.” from the report
- 01How often are windows opened now to provide natural ventilation, and how is this recorded?
- 02How are visitors currently scheduled, restricted to certain areas and escorted?
- 03How often are people living in the home and staff tested for COVID-19?
- 04What arrangements are in place for safe admissions and managing any infection outbreak?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not provide ratings for the other care areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 March 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 Court Care Home
5 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Requires improvement to Inadequate.
- September 2023Inadequatecurrent ratingSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015Inspected but not ratedEffective: Requires improvement
- March 2015Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
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.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 December 2010.
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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Cambridgeshire
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 £1,200 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 12 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.