Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a nursing home

What the CQC found at St Marks Nursing Home

Goodpublished 29 June 2026, 3 months ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2022

Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control practices were safe.

This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 31 October 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control during COVID-19, and asked about staffing pressures.

Inspectors found good supplies of protective equipment. Staff had completed infection control training and used protective equipment correctly. The home was clean and tidy, with enhanced cleaning in place.

Inspectors were assured that the home managed infection risks, including visitors, admissions, outbreaks and signs of infection. Visiting was not restricted, although face masks were encouraged in communal areas.

The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most areas of care.

What inspectors praised
  • Staff infection control training

    Staff had completed infection prevention and control training, with more training planned.

    “Staff had completed IPC training, with further training being planned.” from the report
  • Clean environment

    The home was clean and tidy. Enhanced cleaning practices were being used to help manage infections.

    “The home was clean and tidy throughout. Staff maintained enhanced cleaning practices to help manage infections.” from the report
  • Protective equipment

    The home had good supplies of protective equipment and staff used it correctly.

    “The provider had good supplies of PPE and staff used this correctly.” from the report
  • Visiting

    There were no restrictions on visiting at the time of the inspection. Face masks were encouraged in communal areas.

    “There were no restrictions on visiting the home. Face mask wearing was encouraged in communal areas.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What infection prevention and control training have staff completed since this inspection?
  2. 02How do you make sure protective equipment is still available and used correctly?
  3. 03What measures are currently in place to manage staffing pressures linked to COVID-19 or other illness?
  4. 04How do you respond if there is an infection outbreak in the home?
  5. 05Are visiting arrangements still unrestricted, and when would face masks be required?

This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 December 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.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, September 2018

St Marks Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support, with some improvements needed to staffing levels and emergency plans.

Inspectors visited on 1 and 3 August 2018. The first visit was unannounced. This was the first inspection since the home was registered in September 2017.

They spoke with people, staff and a relative, observed care, and reviewed care plans, medicines records, recruitment files, training records and management records. They also contacted local organisations for their views.

The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, received their medicines safely, and had care plans based on their individual needs.

There were some points to improve. People said more staff would be helpful at busy times. Some emergency evacuation plans did not contain enough individual detail, and a survey included a concern about the presentation and variety of food at times.

What inspectors praised
  • Safe medicines

    Inspectors found that medicines were given in line with good practice. Records were complete and staff had training and competency checks.

    “People's medicines were administered in accordance with best practice and managed in a safe way.” from the report
  • Personalised care

    Care plans described people's needs, choices, preferences and usual routines. They were reviewed when people's needs changed.

    “Care plans were personalised, detailed and reviewed regularly and included people's personal preferences.” from the report
  • Kind and respectful staff

    People described staff as caring and friendly. Inspectors saw staff protecting people's dignity and supporting their independence.

    “Staff treated people with dignity and respect and promoted their independence when supporting them with daily tasks.” from the report
  • Active management

    The home used audits and meetings to monitor safety and quality. It also worked with other organisations to coordinate people's care.

    “There were audit systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Staffing at busy times

    needs fixing

    People said there were enough staff to meet their needs, but several felt more staff would help, particularly when people were getting up or going to bed.

    “Yes (there's enough) but they could do with a couple more for getting up on a morning and going to bed on a night time because they don't seem to have a lot of time.” from the report
  • Emergency evacuation plans

    needs fixing

    Each person had an emergency evacuation plan, but some did not say exactly how many staff were needed to help that person. The manager said these plans would be updated immediately.

    “Each person had a Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan (PEEP) but we noted they did not always contain specific detailed information relating to the individual.” from the report
  • Food presentation and choice

    minor

    A satisfaction survey was mainly positive, but it included a negative comment about the presentation and variety of food at times. The manager planned to discuss meals and menus with people and kitchen staff.

    “The was a negative comment received regarding the presentation and variety of food at times.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How many staff are usually on duty when people are getting up and going to bed?
  2. 02Have all personal emergency evacuation plans been updated with the exact help each person needs?
  3. 03What changes were made to the presentation and variety of food after the survey feedback?
  4. 04How are care plans reviewed when a person's health or support needs change?
  5. 05What activities are available on days when the activities co-ordinator is not working?

This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and included observations, discussions with people and staff, and reviews of care, medicines, recruitment and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 September 2018 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of St Marks Nursing Home

Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.

  1. December 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent rating
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read what inspectors found at St Marks Nursing Home →

  2. September 2018Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at St Marks Nursing Home →

  3. September 2017

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 September 2017.

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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

46 live-in carers within about an hour of Sunderland

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 £950 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.

“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
Judith W., about Petty Tutsirai C.
See live-in carers near SunderlandProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.