CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at The Star Nursing Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection-control arrangements during the COVID-19 thematic review.
The inspection took place on 23 October 2020 and was announced. It was a targeted inspection focused only on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using personal protective equipment safely, managing visitors and admissions, supporting testing, and following shielding, social distancing and hygiene measures.
The home had introduced twice-daily health and temperature checks. It did not use agency staff, and it had introduced measures such as motion-sensor lights and disinfectable furniture to reduce infection risks.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall rating or ratings for the other areas of care.
Regular health checks
The home checked people's health and temperatures twice a day. These checks helped nursing staff identify early signs of other infections on at least four occasions.
“The registered manager had introduced monitoring of people's health and temperatures twice daily.” from the report
No agency staff
The home did not use agency staff. Inspectors said this reduced the risk of staff bringing infection from other care services.
“External staff, such as agency staff were not used.” from the report
Infection-control equipment and layout
Motion-sensor lights and planned disinfectable furniture were being used to reduce touching of surfaces. Clear face masks had also been ordered to help communication while staff wore face coverings.
“The registered manager had introduced assistive technology in order to minimise the spread of infection and support the domestic staff.” from the report
Staff support and training
Staff took part in a COVID-19 wellbeing survey and reported feeling supported and having enough training in infection prevention and control and PPE.
“Staff felt well-supported. They also felt that they had received enough training in regard to IPC (infection prevention control) and the use of PPE (personal protective equipment).” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are twice-daily health and temperature checks recorded, and what happens when they identify a possible infection?
- 02Are clear face masks now available, and how do they help residents who find ordinary face coverings make communication difficult?
- 03How do you make sure staff do not work in other care services and bring infection into the home?
- 04How are new residents tested and admitted safely?
- 05What full inspection ratings or information are available for areas not covered by this targeted inspection?
This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the home was inspected but not rated and the report does not assess the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 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, September 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and person-centred care, with limited dining space and one transfer concern noted.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 23 July 2019. One inspector spoke with people, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. They also reviewed care records, medicines records and other management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were happy, treated kindly and supported by staff who knew them well. Care plans were personalised, medicines were managed safely and people were supported to make choices.
There were some issues to address. Space constraints meant there were not enough dining places for everyone to eat at a table if they wished. One person was not supported in a caring way during a transfer, and the manager said this would be addressed. Further work was also underway on some mental capacity records.
The overall Good rating means the inspectors found the service met legal requirements and provided consistently good care at the time of this inspection. The previous inspection, published in November 2016, had also rated the home Good.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives said staff were kind and caring. Inspectors saw positive interactions and found that privacy, dignity and personal histories were respected.
“People and their relatives described the staff as kind and caring.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's likes, dislikes and needs. Staff offered choices and involved people and relatives in care planning.
“Care plans were person centred and gave staff information on how to support them.” from the report
Safe medicines and risk management
Medicines were administered, stored and recorded safely. Individual risks and incidents were reviewed, with lessons shared with staff.
“People's medicines were administered, stored and recorded safely.” from the report
Supported staff team
Staff received role-specific training, regular supervision and support to develop their skills. Staff said they felt listened to and supported by the manager.
“Staff received the appropriate support to acquire and maintain skills and abilities to provide people with effective care and treatment.” from the report
Limited dining space
needs fixingThere were not enough seated dining places for everyone to eat at a table if they wanted to. Staff managed this by supporting some people to eat in comfortable armchairs.
“However, we noted due to space constraints there were not enough seated dinning spaces at lunch to ensure everyone could eat at a table if this was their choice.” from the report
One poor transfer experience
needs fixingInspectors saw one person moved from a chair to a wheelchair without caring support. The manager said this would be addressed and procedures put in place to prevent it happening again.
“However, the person was not supported in a caring way by staff.” from the report
Further mental capacity records needed
minorThe home had assessed capacity and recorded best interest decisions, but inspectors noted that further work was needed to capture all parts of some people's needs.
“There was further work underway to ensure that all elements of a person's needs were captured in the assessment and decision-making process.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to ensure everyone who wants to eat at a table can do so?
- 02How do you check that staff support people in a caring and respectful way during transfers?
- 03How are mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions kept complete and up to date?
- 04How do you make sure lessons from accidents, incidents and complaints lead to changes in care?
- 05How will you respond if my relative or our family has a concern about their care?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including the care and the premises; all five ratings were given as Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 September 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.
Every inspection of The Star Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 May 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Peterborough
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 £1,370 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I honestly feel lucky to have found her and have already booked her for another visit.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.