CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at The Red House Nursing Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Safeguarding referrals were not always made, fire safety records were insufficient and recruitment evidence for temporary workers was incomplete. Infection prevention arrangements were found to be effective, but medicines and some risk records needed improvement.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. People and relatives gave positive feedback about the kindness and approachability of staff.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Governance systems did not identify important risks. The home had also failed to notify the CQC about some events and could not fully demonstrate that it had followed the duty of candour.
What inspectors found, July 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care and good infection control, but important safety and leadership systems had gaps.
The unannounced inspection took place on 26 May 2022. One inspector spoke with people, the manager, relatives and a staff member, and checked care plans, recruitment records, training information, audits, medicines records and safety records.
The home was not always keeping people safe. Safeguarding concerns had not always been referred to the local authority. Fire drill records did not show that all staff had practised what to do in an emergency. Checks and training evidence for agency workers were also incomplete.
Leadership and oversight were not effective enough. The home had not notified the CQC about some significant events, had not fully shown that it followed the duty of candour, and its checks had not identified the problems found during inspection.
The overall rating changed from Good to Requires Improvement. The Safe and Well-led ratings were Requires Improvement. The other key questions were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used in the overall rating.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements for hygiene, protective equipment, testing, visitors and managing infection outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks could be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Working with health professionals
Staff worked with health and social care professionals and followed their advice. The home had also made some improvements to support people with dementia and their wellbeing.
“We could see staff worked alongside health and social care professionals such as GPs and followed their advice.” from the report
Safeguarding referrals
seriousSome injuries and falls had not been referred to the local authority safeguarding team when required. This increased the risk that people were not fully protected from avoidable harm.
“We found incidents had not been reported to the local authority safeguarding team.” from the report
Fire safety practice
seriousFire drill records were too brief to show who had taken part, what problems were found or what needed improving. The fire risk assessment had also not been reviewed by its due date.
“We could not be confident all staff working at the home were regularly involved in practice evacuations and would know what to do in the event of a fire.” from the report
Agency worker checks
seriousRecords from the agency did not show that enhanced DBS checks had been completed or when training had taken place. Inspectors could not be confident that temporary workers had been recruited safely and had the right skills.
“We could not be confident the home was using temporary workers who had been robustly recruited and had the necessary skills to meet people's needs.” from the report
Weak management oversight
seriousThe home's audits and monitoring did not identify the problems found during inspection. Records of senior oversight were also limited.
“This showed quality assurance systems were ineffective in identifying risks to people's health, safety and welfare.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingThere were minor gaps in medicines records, and there was no system to check them before nurses went off duty. Inspectors recommended a handover system to prevent missing entries.
“There was no system for checking that medicines records were completed before nurses went off duty.” from the report
- 01What action have you taken to make sure every safeguarding concern and serious injury is referred to the local authority when required?
- 02When was the home's fire risk assessment last reviewed, and how do you record that every staff member has taken part in a meaningful fire drill?
- 03How do you now check DBS records, recruitment information and training dates for agency workers before they work in the home?
- 04What system now checks medicines records at the end of every shift?
- 05How do you record and monitor incidents, notifications and conversations with families when something goes wrong?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; the other key question ratings carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 July 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, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, but visiting arrangements and vaccination records needed attention.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 24 February 2022. It looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
Inspectors found good infection control measures. Visitors were asked for a same-day lateral flow test, PPE was available, people and staff were regularly tested, and the home was clean. People were admitted safely and infection outbreaks could be managed.
During outbreaks, visits had been restricted apart from visits at the end of life. The home had not asked families whether they wanted to become essential care givers. The provider also had not initially shown proof of vaccination for all non-exempt staff, although this information was provided the day after the inspection. The service was inspected but not rated.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had effective measures to prevent and manage infections.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks could be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
PPE and testing
PPE was available around the home, staff had been trained to use it, and people and staff had regular testing.
“There were PPE stations around the home and staff were seen wearing PPE.” from the report
Safe admissions
People were tested when they moved in to help check that they did not have coronavirus.
“People were admitted to the home safely. Appropriate testing was carried out to ensure people did not have the coronavirus when they moved in to the home.” from the report
Visiting during outbreaks
needs fixingThe home had restricted visits during two outbreaks without first asking families whether they wanted to become essential care givers. The provider showed inspectors a letter intended to address this after the inspection.
“The service's approach to visiting had not taken into account guidance from the government to permit relatives to keep in touch with their family members in person, including during outbreaks of coronavirus.” from the report
Vaccination evidence
needs fixingAt the inspection, the provider had not ensured it held proof of full COVID-19 vaccination for all non-exempt staff. The information was provided to inspectors the following day.
“At the time of our inspection, the provider had not ensured it had proof of full vaccination against COVID-19 for all non-exempt staff.” from the report
- 01What are the current visiting arrangements if there is an infection outbreak?
- 02Can a relative become an identified essential care giver, and what support or care can they provide?
- 03How do you check and record COVID-19 vaccination or exemption status for all staff and visiting professionals?
- 04What infection testing is currently carried out for residents, staff and visitors?
- 05How would you keep my relative in contact with family if visits had to be restricted?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; it did not assess the other four CQC questions and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 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.
Every inspection of The Red House Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- July 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 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
89 live-in carers within about an hour of Buckinghamshire
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 £1,020 to £1,300 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.