CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at St Joseph's Nursing 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, January 2020
St Joseph's Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, but some activity and record-keeping needed improvement.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 03 and 04 December 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, good training, detailed care plans and good links with health professionals.
People and relatives described staff as kind, respectful and knowledgeable. The home offered group and individual activities and provided good end of life care.
There were some areas to improve. Activity records did not clearly show the benefit to people, some records were untidy or difficult to use, and one person found a talking books service difficult to use. The home agreed to take action.
Risk and medicines
Risk assessments covered important areas such as falls, pressure care and moving people safely. Medicines were stored, checked and given safely.
“Risk assessments had been completed which covered a range of topics, such as, bed rails, moving and positioning, falls and pressure care.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff being calm, attentive and respectful, while supporting people's choices and independence.
“People and their family members told us that, "Staff are all so kind and I find I can talk to them” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's physical, mental, emotional and social needs. Staff updated plans when people's health or care needs changed.
“People's care plans were person centred and detailed, covering key areas such as people's physical, mental, emotional and social needs” from the report
End of life care
The home recorded people's end of life preferences and worked with families and health professionals. Inspectors found care at the end of life was respectful and compassionate.
“The service provided good end of life care to people.” from the report
Management and teamwork
The management team was described as visible and approachable. Staff reported good support, communication and teamwork.
“The management team were visible and approachable.” from the report
Activities were not always individual enough
needs fixingSome people said they became bored or wanted more one-to-one time. Inspectors could not clearly see from the records how much satisfaction people gained from activities.
“It was difficult to see the outcomes for people and how much satisfaction they were getting from the activities on offer.” from the report
Care records needed improvement
needs fixingSome care files were difficult for staff to use because information was hard to find. Daily notes were also dirty, torn and untidy, although the home planned to replace them and move to computerised records.
“The management of the care files needed some improving.” from the report
Communication support
minorOne person found the talking books service difficult to use. Inspectors asked the manager to investigate and resolve this.
“One person used the talking books service although they told us it was difficult to use.” from the report
- 01How do you provide meaningful one-to-one activities for people who spend time in their rooms or have difficulty communicating?
- 02How do you record whether activities are enjoyable and beneficial for each person?
- 03Have the care files been transferred to the computerised care planning programme, and is information now easy for staff to find?
- 04Have the dirty, torn and untidy daily notes been replaced?
- 05What was done to make the talking books service easier for the person who found it difficult to use?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the ratings in all five areas remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 January 2020 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, January 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with all five areas rated Good.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 19 December 2016. Two inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, managers, nurses, care staff and kitchen staff. They reviewed care records, recruitment files, staff support records, audits and policies.
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. They found appropriate recruitment checks, safe medicines practice and suitable safeguarding arrangements. People had access to food, drinks and healthcare professionals, and staff supported their choices.
The report describes staff as kind, respectful and familiar with people's routines. Care plans were individualised, activities were varied and complaints were dealt with quickly. The overall rating was Good, as were the ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and appropriate checks before staff started work.
“People were cared for safely by staff who had been recruited and employed after appropriate checks had been completed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were attentive, knew people's preferences and supported privacy, dignity and personal routines.
“Staff knew people well and what their preferred routines were. Staff showed compassion towards people.” from the report
Individual care planning
Care plans recorded people's preferences and support needs and were regularly reviewed.
“From care plans we reviewed we saw that they were person centred and clearly identified people's preferences, individual support needs and were regularly reviewed.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could follow their interests, join activities and stay in contact with friends, relatives and the local community.
“People were supported to keep community contacts and to remain in touch with friends and family.” from the report
Listening and improvement
The home collected views through meetings, conversations and questionnaires, and used audits to monitor care.
“There were systems in place to seek the views of people who used the service and others and to use their feedback to make improvements.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you check that staffing levels continue to match my relative's needs, especially at busy times?
- 02How will you review and update my relative's care plan as their needs or preferences change?
- 03How are medicines checked, and how would you respond if my relative refused a medicine or needed extra pain relief?
- 04What activities and community visits could be arranged to match my relative's interests?
- 05How can my family raise a concern or complaint, and how will we be kept informed of the response?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; the report gives a Good rating for each. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 January 2017 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 Joseph's Nursing Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 February 2015.
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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.