CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at The Arc
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risk assessments had been updated, medicines were managed safely, staffing levels were sufficient and infection control arrangements were described as robust.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed during this focused inspection. Its rating was not given in the report text.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed during this focused inspection. Its rating was not given in the report text.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records were personalised and reflected people's choices and needs. Staff supported communication, complaints and contact with family and friends, although pandemic restrictions meant people were cared for in their rooms.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and senior staff used audits and checks to monitor care and safety. Records and risk assessments had improved, but there was no registered manager while a permanent manager was being recruited.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, personalised care and better record keeping, although there was no registered manager in post.
Inspectors carried out a focused inspection, with inspection activity from 28 to 30 October 2020 and a site visit on 29 October. They spoke with people, a relative, staff and the manager. They checked care records, medicines, infection control, staffing, the building and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and involved in their care. Inspectors found updated risk assessments, safe medicines procedures, enough staff, good infection control and personalised care records.
This followed a previous Requires Improvement rating and a breach of Regulation 17 about good governance. Inspectors found that improvements had been made and the home was no longer in breach. The inspection did not assess every area of care.
Safer risk management
Staff had updated, person-centred risk assessments. The manager investigated accidents and incidents and took action to reduce repeat risks.
“At this inspection staff had recorded and updated risks which were person centred and showed staff had enough information to support people.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors found effective infection prevention arrangements, including PPE, staff training, testing and separate areas based on COVID-19 status.
“The manager made sure the service had robust safety hygiene and infection prevention and control (IPC) practices.” from the report
Enough suitable staff
Recruitment checks were completed and inspectors found enough suitably skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs.
“Staff were sufficient in number, suitably skilled and experienced and able to meet people's needs.” from the report
Personalised care
Care records reflected people's preferences and staff involved people in decisions about their support. Staff also knew how people communicated.
“On this inspection care records were personalised, informative and clearly involved the person in how they wanted their support provided.” from the report
Improved governance
The previous governance breach had been addressed. Senior staff monitored care records, infection control and the wider service through audits.
“Enough improvement had been made at this inspection and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation 17.” from the report
No registered manager
minorThere was no manager registered with the CQC when inspectors visited. A temporary manager was leading the home while the provider recruited a permanent manager.
“The service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission when we inspected.” from the report
- 01Who is currently managing the home, and what is the progress on recruiting and registering a permanent manager?
- 02How will staff support my relative if they need help managing risks or if there is an accident or incident?
- 03How often will my relative be able to leave their room, receive visitors and contact family under the current COVID-19 arrangements?
- 04How will my relative's care plan be reviewed and updated as their rehabilitation needs change?
- 05Does the home provide the type of end of life care my relative may need, given that the report says it does not provide end of life care?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led; Effective and Caring were not assessed during this visit, and the report says ratings for areas not looked at came from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 November 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, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control measures at the home.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 29 October and 3 November 2020. Inspectors looked only at infection prevention and control because the home was being used for people discharged from hospital with COVID-19.
Inspectors found that staff had access to and used personal protective equipment correctly. Visitors were screened and given protective equipment. People were admitted safely, isolated in their rooms and cared for in zones based on their COVID-19 status.
Risk assessments were updated, cleaning was increased and monitored, and staff completed infection control training. People and staff were tested regularly. Inspectors said they were assured that the home met good infection prevention and control guidelines.
The home was inspected but not rated. This inspection did not assess the wider quality of care, such as whether care was caring, effective, responsive or well-led.
PPE and visitor checks
Staff could easily access PPE and used and disposed of it correctly. Visitors were health screened and given PPE when entering.
“Personal protective equipment (PPE) was easily accessible to staff who used and disposed of it correctly.” from the report
Safe admissions and zoning
The home could admit people who were COVID-19 positive or whose status was not known. People were isolated and staff worked in separate zones.
“People were admitted safely and isolated in their room throughout their stay.” from the report
Cleaning and risk checks
COVID-19 risk assessments were regularly updated. Cleaning was increased and checked frequently.
“Risk assessments relating to COVID-19 were completed and regularly updated. Cleaning schedules had been increased and were frequently monitored.” from the report
Training and testing
Staff had infection control training, and the manager checked hand hygiene and PPE use. Staff and people staying at the home were tested regularly.
“Staff had completed infection prevention and control (IPC) training.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people currently separated or zoned if their infection status is positive or unknown?
- 02How often are infection prevention and control risk assessments updated?
- 03How do you check that staff are using PPE and washing their hands correctly?
- 04How often are residents and staff tested for infections?
- 05How are visitors screened and provided with protective equipment now?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; no ratings were awarded for the wider quality of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 November 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.
Every inspection of The Arc
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2020Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 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
32 live-in carers within about an hour of Blackpool
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 £1,250 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.