CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at St Georges
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection controls, but inconsistent laundry and cleaning practice increased the risk of cross-contamination.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 19 January 2022. It focused on infection prevention, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
Inspectors found robust visitor checks, including testing, temperature checks, screening questions and protective equipment. People were supported to keep in touch with family through visits, telephone calls and video calls.
The home had COVID-19 risk assessments, outbreak plans, testing and vaccination arrangements. Inspectors were assured about infection prevention in most areas. However, they found inconsistent laundry and cleaning practice and oversight, which increased the risk of cross-contamination. Action was taken during the inspection.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give the home an overall quality rating or full ratings for the five key questions.
Visitor safety
Visitors had to complete several checks and wear protective equipment before entering. Visits could take place in bedrooms or a visiting pod.
“Visiting procedures were robust to reduce the risk of COVID-19.” from the report
Keeping families connected
Staff supported people to keep contact with friends and family through different types of visits and communication.
“Staff had supported people to maintain contact with friends and family during the pandemic via window visits, telephone calls and face time calls.” from the report
Infection controls
The home used testing, vaccination, risk assessments, outbreak plans, isolation and zoning. Inspectors observed staff using the correct protective equipment.
“Isolation, cohorting and zoning was used to manage the spread of infection.” from the report
Vaccination arrangements
The home was meeting the requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
“The service was meeting the requirement to ensure non-exempt staff and visiting professionals were vaccinated against COVID-19.” from the report
Laundry and cleaning consistency
needs fixingInspectors found inconsistent laundry and cleaning practice and oversight. This increased the risk of cross-contamination, although action was taken to address it.
“Inconsistent practice and oversight increased the risk of cross contamination.” from the report
- 01What specific changes were made to laundry and cleaning practice after the inspection?
- 02How do managers now check that cleaning and laundry procedures are followed consistently?
- 03What measures are in place if COVID-19 creates staff shortages or other staffing pressures?
- 04How are visitors tested, screened and supported to use protective equipment now?
- 05How does the home manage isolation, cohorting and zoning if there is an infection outbreak?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; it did not provide full ratings for the five key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 February 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, November 2021
St Georges rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found staffing and management systems were not reliable enough to keep people consistently safe.
This was an unannounced inspection on 14 October 2021. Two inspectors spoke with people, staff, relatives and health professionals. They observed care and reviewed care, medicines, staffing, recruitment and management records.
The home was short staffed. Staff were sometimes left with too little time to provide person-centred care, and some people were left without staff attention for long periods. Infection control was also not always managed well, including incorrect mask wearing and some cleanliness problems.
People said they felt safe and medicines were managed safely. Staff recruitment checks were completed, and the manager responded quickly to issues found during the inspection. However, care records, risk assessments and quality checks did not reliably identify or correct problems.
Safe and well-led were both rated Requires Improvement. The other three ratings were not looked at during this inspection and were carried over from the previous inspection. The overall rating fell from Good in 2018 to Requires Improvement.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe with the staff and the care provided.
“People told us they felt safe with staff and the care provided.” from the report
Medicines were managed safely
Staff were trained and checked as competent. Inspectors found medicines were stored, given and recorded safely.
“People were supported safely to take their prescribed medication.” from the report
Safe recruitment
The records checked showed that appropriate pre-employment checks had been completed.
“Records confirmed satisfactory pre-employment checks were completed.” from the report
Positive views of the manager
People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the new manager. Inspectors said the manager responded quickly to concerns raised during the visit.
“People and relatives spoke positively about the manager and senior care worker.” from the report
Working with health professionals
The home worked with visiting health professionals, who gave positive feedback about communication and awareness of people's needs.
“They had no concerns about people's health or safety and said staff had good awareness of people's need, provided information and communicated effectively.” from the report
Not enough staff
seriousThe home was repeatedly short staffed. Staff had too little time for meaningful interaction, and people were sometimes left without staff attention for long periods.
“The provider failed to ensure there were enough staff deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Infection control and cleanliness
needs fixingSome staff did not wear masks correctly. Inspectors also found old food debris, drink stains and cobwebs, although the manager said these issues would be addressed.
“We were not assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Care records needed improvement
needs fixingSome risk assessments and care plans did not fully reflect people's health conditions or explain how staff should support them. Daily records did not always show whether essential care had been provided.
“Daily records were not fully completed to confirm whether personal care support was provided.” from the report
Limited activities and involvement
needs fixingRelatives raised concerns about limited meaningful interaction and activities. People and relatives were not routinely asked for their views about the service.
“This meant people could experience a feeling of loneliness and isolation which could be detrimental to their mental wellbeing.” from the report
- 01What is the current staffing level on each shift, and how is it checked against people's assessed needs?
- 02What evidence can you show that staff shortages and deployment problems have been fixed?
- 03How are you checking that care plans, risk assessments and daily care records are complete and up to date?
- 04What checks now confirm that cleaning standards and correct use of masks are being maintained?
- 05How are residents and relatives being asked for their views, and what activities are available each day?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; the other three ratings were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 November 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
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2021Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2015Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leicester
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 £1,270 a week. 83 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“Tino was the most wonderfully rounded, empathetic and intuitive person. He not only developed a great relationship with Neville but also had a great working relationship with our existing carer.”
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.