CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at The Sloane Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, June 2019
The Sloane Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and well-organised care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection over two days. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines, training, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were treated kindly, their needs were assessed, medicines were managed safely and staff had the training and support needed.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement, with a breach of regulation. The provider had made improvements and was no longer in breach. The inspection found the home met the standard for Good in all areas.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff communicate patiently, protect privacy and treat people with dignity.
“Throughout our inspection we observed staff interacted with people, had good relationships with individuals and staff were kind and empathetic in their approach.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, administered and monitored safely. Staff had medicines training and their skills were checked.
“Medicines were managed, administered and stored safely and people and their relatives told us they received their medicine as prescribed.” from the report
Personalised activities
People could choose from a range of activities and trips. The home had also introduced a smaller lunch event after listening to feedback.
“There was a variety of internal and external activities planned including visits from local community groups and schools and trips out for coffee or lunch” from the report
Improved oversight
The provider had strengthened checks on the building, equipment, care records, medicines and other areas since the previous inspection.
“There were effective processes in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service and to make improvements when required.” from the report
End of life support
Care plans recorded people's wishes about end of life care. Inspectors noted the home had received the highest level of the Gold Standard Framework award.
“People received responsive care and support at the end of their lives.” from the report
Staffing pressure
needs fixingPeople and relatives gave mixed views about staffing. Four posts were vacant during the inspection, although inspectors saw call bells answered promptly and found staffing levels were being reviewed.
“The registered manager told us there were currently four staff posts vacant which they were in the process of recruiting for.” from the report
Mixed views about food
minorSome people and relatives felt the food was only adequate, although the home consulted people about menus and recorded dietary needs.
“The chef is very nice, but food quality is only adequate at best” from the report
Family communication
minorOne relative said communication with families could improve and that there were no relatives' meetings. The manager was discussing whether regular meetings would be helpful.
“Yes, the home is well run, but communication with families could be improved and there are no relatives' meetings.” from the report
- 01How many staff posts are currently vacant, and how do you make sure there are enough staff during busy mornings?
- 02What do residents and relatives currently say about the quality and choice of food?
- 03How do you keep families informed about care, and do you now hold relatives' meetings?
- 04What medicines checks and staff competency assessments are carried out now?
- 05What changes have been made since the previous inspection's breach about monitoring the safety of the premises and equipment?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; the previous inspection ratings were reviewed for comparison. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 June 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
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind and responsive care, but safety checks, medicines practice, mealtimes and management oversight needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 14 and 15 February 2018. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, staff records, the building and management records.
People were generally treated with kindness and respect. Care was planned around people's needs, activities were provided, and people had access to health professionals. However, inspectors found problems with the safety of the building, time-sensitive medicines and some mealtime support.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall. Caring and Responsive were rated Good. Safe, Effective and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. The report says the home breached Regulation 17 because its systems for checking the safety of premises and equipment were not effective.
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as kind and attentive. Inspectors observed respectful interactions and staff responding to people's requests.
“People told us they were happy with the care they received and staff were kind, supportive and attentive.” from the report
Individual care planning
Care plans included people's health needs, preferences, communication needs and end-of-life wishes. People and relatives were involved where appropriate.
“Care plans and records documented the care and support people required in a range of areas relevant to their needs” from the report
Activities and independence
The home provided activities, outings and exercises. Staff supported people to remain as independent as possible and respected their diverse needs.
“People's diverse needs and independence was promoted and respected and activities were provided to meet people's need for stimulation.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff received induction, regular supervision, appraisals and training relevant to their roles and the needs of people living in the home.
“There was a comprehensive induction and training programme in place for new staff.” from the report
Building safety checks
seriousImportant safety issues were not consistently identified or followed through. These included unlocked doors, incomplete action on water safety recommendations and urgent electrical work.
“Failure to maintain effective oversight of health and safety issues is a breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities Regulations 2014).” from the report
Medicines timing
needs fixingThe morning medicines round was lengthy, and one pain medicine was recorded as the 9am dose even though it was given at 10:40am. The report recommended reviewing current guidance on time-sensitive medicines.
“We recommend that the service considers and refers to current medicines guidance and practice on time sensitive medicines and takes action to update their practice accordingly.” from the report
Mealtime support
seriousOne person at risk of choking did not receive direct one-to-one supervision throughout the meal as advised. A drink had also not been thickened in line with guidance.
“We observed that whilst staff were in and out of the dining room staff did not provide direct one to one supervision in line with guidance throughout the meal and this required improvement.” from the report
Mealtime experience
needs fixingInspectors saw limited staff interaction in some areas where meals were served. People also gave mixed views about food quality, temperature and whether they received the right meal.
“There was no staff presence in the conservatory during lunch except to bring in food and there was limited interaction in the other rooms where food was being served.” from the report
- 01What has been done to make sure doors to the laundry, sluice room and basement are kept secure?
- 02Have all urgent and dangerous issues from the electrical installation check been completed, and can you show me the records?
- 03How do you make sure medicines that must be given at particular times are administered and recorded on time?
- 04How will you provide one-to-one supervision and follow swallowing guidance for people at risk of choking?
- 05What changes have been made to staff deployment and interaction during mealtimes?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection of the overall service, covering all five questions and both the accommodation and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 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 Sloane Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2019Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 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 Bromley
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. 83 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
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.