CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Summerdyne Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks, including visitors, admissions, PPE, testing, cleaning and outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong COVID-19 infection control arrangements.
The home provides personal and nursing care for up to 27 people. At the inspection, 23 people were living there.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 26 February 2021. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control measures because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured about visiting arrangements, admissions, testing, PPE, cleaning, social distancing and the infection control policy. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Safe visiting
The home had a visiting area with direct access outside. People also kept in touch with relatives through window visits, telephone calls and video calls.
“Arrangements were in place for safe visiting, with an area with direct access to the outside of the home.” from the report
Safe admissions
The home tested people and used self-isolation when they were admitted.
“The provider admitted people to the service safely and followed best practice guidance, such as testing and self-isolating on admission.” from the report
Handwashing checks
An ultraviolet light kit was used to show staff where handwashing had missed areas and which surfaces needed regular cleaning.
“The registered manager had purchased an ultraviolet light kit (highlights germs) to show staff which areas of their hands had been missed when washing” from the report
PPE and testing
Inspectors found that PPE was available and used. Visitors recorded negative COVID-19 test results, and people and staff had regular testing.
“PPE was available and used by staff at all times.” from the report
Vaccination
All people living in the home had received their first COVID-19 vaccine by the inspection.
“People and staff in the home had regular testing for COVID-19 and all people had received their first vaccine.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are safe visits arranged now, and is there still a visiting area with direct access outside?
- 02What testing and self-isolation arrangements are used when someone is admitted?
- 03How do you check that staff are using PPE correctly and washing their hands thoroughly?
- 04How often are people and staff tested for COVID-19, and how are infection outbreaks managed?
- 05What are the home's current arrangements for keeping in touch with relatives through visits, telephone calls or video calls?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; the service was inspected but not rated and the other four questions were not covered. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 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.
What inspectors found, March 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, while care-plan detail was still being improved.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 22 January 2019. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a visiting health professional. They observed care and checked care, medicines and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people felt safe, staff were kind and respectful, medicines were checked, and people's health and care needs were reviewed.
The home had a new manager who had recently taken over. Staffing numbers had increased, and new systems were being introduced to review care. The overall rating remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection published in March 2016.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt reassured. Staff understood how to protect people and respond to risks.
“People and relatives we spoke with told us they felt assured their family member was safe at the home.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw warmth and kindness in staff interactions. People were supported to express their views and keep their dignity and independence.
“We saw staff demonstrating warmth and kindness towards people and people responded with smiles and tactile demonstrations of affection.” from the report
Personalised activities
Staff recorded people's interests and supported activities such as shopping, religious services, trips out and keeping in touch with family.
“The activities coordinator met with each person and recorded their preferences and what interests they chose to pursue.” from the report
Good healthcare support
Nurses worked with other healthcare professionals, and advice was followed and included in people's care.
“A healthcare professional we spoke with told us they felt assured that people received the care they needed, and that advice was appropriately sought and followed.” from the report
Improving oversight
The provider and new manager had introduced an action plan and electronic care records to help monitor whether care tasks and information were up to date.
“The manager demonstrated how care plans had been reviewed and changed to a new electronic format.” from the report
Care-plan detail
minorThe new manager had identified that care plans needed more detailed information. This was being addressed, but families should check how far the improvement has progressed.
“The manager had identified areas that required further improvement. For example, the manager was encouraging staff to complete more detailed information in care plans.” from the report
- 01How have care plans become more detailed since the inspection, and who checks that the information is complete and current?
- 02How is the new electronic care-record system used to identify missed tasks or missing information?
- 03Have staffing numbers remained at the increased level, and how does the home make sure people are supported when they need help?
- 04How are my relative's interests, choices and preferred activities recorded and reviewed?
- 05How would my relative and family be involved in planning end-of-life care if this became necessary?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 March 2019 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 Summerdyne Nursing Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 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 Worcestershire
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 £1,260 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“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.