CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Treetops Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safeguarding systems and appropriate medicines procedures. Some care plan information was inconsistent, and some medicines competency checks needed refreshing.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and preferences were assessed, staff received training and healthcare professionals were contacted when needed. Inspectors observed that some people needed more prompting and support to finish meals.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed to be kind, patient and respectful. Relatives said staff knew people well and provided caring and knowledgeable support.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's needs and preferences. Daily activities were offered, visits were supported in line with guidance, and relatives knew how to raise concerns.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open culture, approachable management and systems to monitor quality and safety. Inspectors saw evidence that actions and improvements were recorded.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Treetops Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with some records, dining support and training needing attention.
The CQC carried out an unannounced inspection on 10 December 2021. Two inspectors reviewed care records, medicines, safety certificates, staff training, management records and infection control. They also spoke with staff, relatives and other professionals.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, respectful care, suitable activities, good links with healthcare professionals and systems to monitor quality and safety.
There were some areas to improve. Parts of people's care plans were not fully accurate, some people had too little prompting during meals, and some refresher training had been delayed. The manager acted on the dining issue and was addressing the training and care plan points.
The overall Good rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published on 13 June 2019. This means inspectors found the service meeting the relevant standards, although it was not without minor weaknesses.
Kind and respectful staff
Staff were seen treating people with patience, kindness, dignity and respect. Relatives also gave positive feedback about the staff.
“Staff were observed to be kind and patient with people and maintained positive and supportive interactions.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were sufficient to meet people's needs. Recruitment and safeguarding arrangements were also in place.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Interactions between people and staff were positive and person-centred.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were offered activities each day that took account of their abilities and preferences. Relatives and friends could visit in line with government guidance.
“Activities were offered daily which considered peoples abilities and preferences.” from the report
Open management
Staff and relatives felt able to approach management with concerns. The home used meetings and audits to identify and act on improvements.
“Staff reported an open culture in the service which gave them the confidence to approach management if they had any concern.” from the report
Care plan accuracy
needs fixingSome care plans contained discrepancies or details that needed updating. Inspectors recommended reviewing them so staff have accurate information for safe care.
“We recommend the service review the care plans in place to ensure information is accurate and supports staff to provide safe care.” from the report
Support at mealtimes
needs fixingSome people were left for periods with little prompting or support to finish their meals. The manager reviewed dining practices after the inspection, and inspectors said there was no impact on people.
“Some people were left for periods of time with little prompting or support to finish their meals.” from the report
Refresher training
minorSome refresher training was out of date because COVID-19 restrictions had caused delays. The manager was taking action to address this.
“Some refresher training was out of date. This was due to restrictions caused as an outcome of the COVID-19 pandemic.” from the report
- 01Have all care plans been reviewed so that the information about each person's needs and preferences is accurate?
- 02What changes were made to support people better during meals, and how do you check that people receive enough prompting and help?
- 03Which refresher training was delayed, and has all of it now been completed?
- 04How are medicines competency checks kept up to date?
- 05How are families involved in reviewing care plans and raising concerns?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control; inspectors reviewed a sample of two people's care records and spoke with a limited number of relatives and staff. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 February 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, June 2019
Treetops Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with accident records needing more detailed analysis.
This was an unannounced inspection on 8 May 2019. Two inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files and quality records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, safe medicines practice, good support with food and drink, and strong links with health professionals.
People were treated with dignity and respect. Care plans reflected people's needs and interests, and staff spent time with people in meaningful activities and one-to-one support.
The provider was asked to improve how it analysed accidents and incidents, so that possible patterns or trends could be identified. This was a recommendation, not a stated breach of regulations.
People felt safe
Safeguarding systems were in place, staff understood how to report concerns, and relatives said they felt people were safe.
“Staff knew who to inform if they had any concerns in relation to abuse. They had received effective training and demonstrated a thorough awareness of safeguarding procedures.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were attentive and built calm, caring relationships. Inspectors saw people being treated with dignity and supported in a respectful way.
“Observations showed staff treated people with dignity and respect. Where people were cared for in bed, this was done in a dignified way ensuring people's privacy was respected.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included detailed information about people's needs, preferences and interests. Activities and daily support were adapted to each person.
“Each person had care plans in place in relation to their assessed needs which contained a high level of person-centred information.” from the report
Positive leadership
Inspectors found a well-run service with regular feedback, staff meetings and quality checks. Staff and relatives spoke positively about the management team.
“There was a comprehensive quality assurance process in place that were effective in highlighting any shortfalls.” from the report
Accident analysis
needs fixingAccidents and incidents were recorded and monitored, but the analysis was not always thorough enough to identify patterns or trends. Inspectors recommended updating this practice.
“A system was in place to monitor accidents and incidents and reduce risks where possible; this could be further adapted to identify any patterns or trends.” from the report
- 01How have you improved the analysis of accidents and incidents since this inspection?
- 02What patterns or trends have you found from recent accidents and incidents, and what actions have followed?
- 03How would you meet my relative's particular dementia, mental health or nursing needs?
- 04How are my relative's food, drink and weight monitored if there are concerns?
- 05How are my relative's wishes recorded and followed if they need end-of-life care?
This was an unannounced inspection of the care, accommodation and overall quality of the service, covering all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 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.
Every inspection of Treetops Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 February 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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of North Yorkshire
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 £1,010 to £1,290 a week. 27 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.