CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at The Evergreens Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe recruitment, regular risk reviews, safe medicine administration and appropriate checks of the building and equipment.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before moving in, and staff had suitable training and support. People were supported with food, drink, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. People and relatives were involved in decisions about care, menus and aspects of the environment.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans gave staff enough information to provide safe care, and activities were available. Inspectors noted that some care plans were still being improved, and found complaints were logged, investigated and responded to.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home was described as consistently managed and well-led, with an open and inclusive culture. Governance arrangements had led to widespread improvements since the previous inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care and widespread improvements since the previous inspection.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 14 March 2019. They spoke with people living there, relatives and staff. They observed care, checked the building and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were treated with kindness and respect, medicines were managed safely, staffing levels were suitable and people's needs were assessed and reviewed.
The previous inspection rated the home Requires Improvement, with a breach about good governance. This inspection found widespread improvements in staffing, care, records, medicines, the building and training. Inspectors said these improvements had been made under the new management team.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw unhurried, respectful interactions. People and relatives said they were happy and well cared for.
“Staff treated people with kindness, compassion and care.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Medicines were given according to prescribers' instructions, with regular checks. Staffing levels were reviewed against people's needs and recruitment checks were completed.
“Medicines were administered safely and in line with the prescriber's instructions.” from the report
Improvement since the last inspection
The home had made broad improvements to staffing, care, records, medicines, the environment and staff training.
“Widespread improvements had been made since the last inspection in relation to staffing, care, records, medicine management, environment support and training.” from the report
People involved in decisions
People and relatives were involved in choices about care, menus and the home's decoration. The home also sought feedback from people, relatives and staff.
“People, and their family members where appropriate, where involved in making decisions about care and support.” from the report
Some care plans still being improved
needs fixingThe management team said not all care plans were as complete as they wanted. Inspectors saw that progress was being made, but this is worth checking for someone with complex or changing needs.
“The management team explained that not all care plans were "as perfect" as they wanted but they said, and we saw that progress was being made.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure care plans are fully personalised and updated when a person's needs change?
- 02What improvements have been made since the March 2019 inspection, and how are they checked now?
- 03How are staffing levels decided for the nursing and residential areas on each shift?
- 04How will you involve our relative and family in decisions about care, activities, menus and the environment?
- 05How do you record, investigate and share the outcome of complaints or concerns?
This was a scheduled, unannounced inspection of the care home, including the premises and care provided, and it assessed all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 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.
What inspectors found, June 2018
Stephenson Court is Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care and progress, but important risks and records were not yet managed consistently.
Inspectors visited unannounced on 14 May 2018 and returned on 18 May 2018. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They checked care records, medicines records, staffing information, training, the building and management systems.
The home had improved since earlier inspections. Staff were kind and respectful, communication had improved, medicines management was better and agency staff use had reduced. However, some risks had not been assessed, medicines records had minor gaps and some care plans did not accurately reflect people's needs.
The home was rated Good for Caring. It was rated Requires Improvement for Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led, giving an overall rating of Requires Improvement. This means inspectors saw progress, but the new systems needed to become reliable and consistent over time.
The home had previously been rated Inadequate and placed in special measures. It had been subject to urgent enforcement action, including a restriction on new admissions. At this inspection it was no longer Inadequate or in special measures.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm relationships between people and staff. Staff spent time talking with people and supported them with dignity.
“We observed care to be unhurried and people were supported in a kind and respectful manner.” from the report
Better communication
Relatives said they were kept informed when people were unwell or had a fall. The home had also strengthened staff handovers and daily meetings.
“One relative said, "They ring if [family member] is unwell or has a fall. The communication is good. We are well informed and kept up to date.” from the report
Improved leadership
The new manager had introduced clearer systems, including audits, meetings, staff supervision and a weekly improvement plan. Staff said morale and support had improved.
“Staff told us things had improved since the last inspection.” from the report
Incomplete risk assessments
seriousMoving and handling and choking risks had not been assessed for two people. The report also noted inconsistent use of lap belts on wheelchairs.
“We identified risks however relating to moving and handling and choking for two people which had not been identified or assessed.” from the report
Care records not reliable
seriousSome records did not clearly describe people's wound care, nutritional needs, risks or current circumstances. This could leave people vulnerable to unsuitable care.
“Continued concerns were found in relation to care records which left people vulnerable to the potential for poor care and treatment.” from the report
Medicines recording gaps
needs fixingMost medicines records were clear, but checks on one person's medicine patch were not recorded and another person's warfarin record was unclear.
“These checks were not being recorded. Another person was prescribed warfarin which is a blood thinning medicine.” from the report
Legal decision-making still developing
needs fixingSome capacity assessments and best interest decisions needed improvement. One record was confusing about whether a person was being deprived of their liberty.
“We recommend the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 code of practice and DoLS code of practice should be fully embedded into systems and processes to ensure compliance.” from the report
Some premises issues
minorSome décor was worn and damaged. Certain chairs and shelving were not fit for purpose and could make cleaning difficult or increase the risk of cross-contamination.
“The décor in some areas was worn and some paintwork was damaged.” from the report
- 01How are you checking that every person's moving and handling, choking and nutrition risks are assessed and kept up to date?
- 02What checks now make sure medicines records, including patch checks and blood-thinning medicines, are completed accurately?
- 03How do you make sure care plans reflect current wound care, diet, swallowing needs and personal preferences?
- 04How are mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions reviewed when a person may lack capacity?
- 05How will staffing levels change as new people are admitted, especially on night shifts?
This was a follow-up inspection covering all five key questions; the home had previously been rated Inadequate and was checked for improvements and continued breaches. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 June 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.
Every inspection of The Evergreens Care Centre
6 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2019Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2018Inadequatestayed InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2018Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- August 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 October 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
30 live-in carers within about an hour of North Tyneside
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 £1,130 a week. 26 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.”
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.