CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at The Lawns
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about most infection control measures. They found that vaccination passport checks for healthcare professionals and contractors needed review, and that staff lateral flow testing was not in line with government guidance.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- This area was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2022
The Lawns was inspected but not rated; inspectors found mostly good COVID-19 safety arrangements, but some visitor checks and staff testing needed improvement.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 19 January 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
Inspectors found good practice in visiting arrangements, PPE, testing, safe admissions, cleaning, vaccinations and meeting people's health needs. They were assured about most infection control measures.
The home was rated inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give a full quality rating. It only looked at the areas covered by this targeted visit.
Visiting arrangements
The home introduced pre-booked visits with negative COVID-19 test results. It also allowed some visits inside the home and outings on a risk-assessed basis.
“Adjustments had been introduced to support visiting by people's nominated relatives (or others).” from the report
Protective equipment
There was enough PPE, it was easy for staff to access, and staff had training in its safe use and disposal.
“The provider had enough Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) which was easily accessible to the staff.” from the report
Safe admissions
New admissions followed a negative COVID-19 test and were supported to self-isolate safely after arrival.
“Admissions were only accepted following a pre-arranged and negative COVID-19 test.” from the report
Cleaning and health support
Cleaning arrangements had been changed to reduce infection risks, and people's health needs continued to be assessed and met during the pandemic.
“Cleaning arrangements had been adjusted to prevent the spread of COVID-19 infection in the care home.” from the report
Visitor vaccination checks
needs fixingChecks of vaccination passports for healthcare professionals and contractors needed review and improvement.
“Arrangements for checking the vaccination passports of healthcare professionals and contractors before they entered the care home required review and improvement.” from the report
Staff testing frequency
needs fixingThe frequency of staff lateral flow testing did not follow government guidance at the time of inspection.
“The frequency of lateral flow testing for staff was not in line with government guidance.” from the report
Essential care giver arrangements
minorVisiting was mainly in the day centre building, and inspectors signposted the provider to resources about essential care givers.
“We signposted the provider to resources to help develop their approach on essential care givers.” from the report
- 01How do you now check the vaccination status or exemptions of healthcare professionals and contractors before they enter?
- 02How often are staff tested for COVID-19 now, and how does this follow current guidance?
- 03Where will visits take place, and what arrangements are available for people who cannot use the day centre building?
- 04How do you support essential care givers and relatives who need to visit regularly?
- 05What infection control arrangements are in place for new admissions and people going out with visitors?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; it did not provide ratings for Effective, Caring, Responsive or Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 March 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.
What inspectors found, October 2018
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but care records needed better management and well-led was Requires Improvement.
Inspectors visited on 04 and 05 October 2018. They looked at the care home, accommodation and care provided to 27 people with complex physical and health needs.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective, caring and responsive care. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training, personalised care and positive relationships with people and their relatives.
The well-led rating fell from Good to Requires Improvement. Some care records contained old information, and assessments and personal histories were not always clearly recorded. The home had plans to review its records, and inspectors made a recommendation about this.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke very positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff communicate kindly, respect privacy and dignity, and help people make choices.
“We observed staff speaking kindly and respectfully to people.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
There were enough staff to support people's safety and wellbeing. Staff were checked and trained, and medicines were managed and given safely and on time.
“Effective systems were in place to manage people's medicines so that they received them safely and on time.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's needs and staff knew people well. The home supported complex needs, healthcare access, personal relationships and individual communication needs.
“People at The Lawns received care which was personalised and focused on their individual needs.” from the report
Activities and end of life care
People could take part in activities, trips and community links. The home had also been accredited for its end of life care.
“The Lawns has recently been accredited by the Gold Standard Framework (GSF) for end of life care.” from the report
Care records were not always clear
needs fixingSome records contained old care plans and assessments, making it unclear which information staff should follow. Inspectors said this could put people at risk, although they found no impact during this inspection because staff knew people well.
“However, the management of people's care records had not always been effective which may put people at risk of not receiving the appropriate care.” from the report
Important information was not always recorded
needs fixingThe outcomes of some mental capacity and risk assessments were not clear in care plans. People's backgrounds and family histories were also not always properly recorded.
“Records showed that people's mental capacity and risks associated with their care were being assessed using national standardised tools however the detail and outcomes of the assessments were not always clear or informed their care plans.” from the report
- 01How have you removed old care plans and made sure staff can quickly identify the current wound, risk and support plans?
- 02How do you record the outcomes of mental capacity and risk assessments in each person's care plan?
- 03How are people's personal histories, relationships and communication needs recorded and kept up to date?
- 04What checks now confirm that staff are following the current care records?
- 05What progress has been made with the planned improvements to parts of the home linked to infection control?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions; the overall rating remained Good, while the well-led rating changed from Good at the previous inspection to Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 October 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 Lawns
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 January 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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Gloucestershire
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 £1,030 to £1,360 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“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.