CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Tynedale
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed, including PPE, hygiene, visitors, admissions and possible outbreaks. Staffing pressures linked to COVID-19 were discussed, but this question was not rated.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not assessed in the targeted inspection, although the report describes the manager's infection control checks and risk assessments.
What inspectors found, December 2022
Tynedale was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and visiting arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 15 September 2022. Inspectors gave the home 24 hours' notice. They looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and any staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
The home was clean. Staff had training and equipment for using personal protective equipment. Risk assessments and policies were in place, and the manager carried out daily checks of infection control practices.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks, including visitors, admissions, hygiene, outbreaks and the use of protective equipment. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Clean home
The home was clean, with hand hygiene points in every room and regular checks by the manager.
“The home was clean. Hand hygiene points were located in every room and the registered manager completed daily walk arounds to ensure IPC guidance was being adhered to.” from the report
PPE arrangements
Staff had access to protective equipment and received extra training during the pandemic on its use and infection control.
“Staff were trained in the use of PPE and had access to this throughout the home.” from the report
Managing visitors
The home had measures at the entrance and inside the building to reduce the risk of visitors spreading infection. Visiting by relatives followed government guidance.
“Appropriate measures were in place at the entrance and inside the home to prevent visitors from spreading infection.” from the report
Risk planning
The manager had identified and assessed COVID-19 risks and had put measures in place to reduce them.
“The registered manager had identified, assessed and mitigated all COVID-19 related risks to people, staff and visitors.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently managing staffing pressures and making sure they do not affect people's care?
- 02How often are infection prevention and control checks now completed, and can we see the current policy?
- 03What training have staff completed on using PPE and infection prevention and control?
- 04How are relatives currently able to visit, and what happens if there is an infection risk or outbreak?
- 05How are risks assessed and managed when someone is admitted to the home?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it was inspected but not rated and did not assess the other key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 December 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, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and person-centred support, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was a planned inspection on 23 and 27 January 2020. One inspector spoke with two relatives and four staff, observed care in shared areas, and checked care, medicines, money, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, well-managed risks, suitable training and detailed support plans.
People were supported to make choices, build daily living skills, keep relationships and take part in activities they enjoyed. Staff understood people's communication needs and supported access to health professionals.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement, published on 13 February 2019, with one breach of Regulation 17. Inspectors found that improvements had been made and the home was no longer in breach.
Person-centred support
Support was built around each person's interests, choices, communication style and goals. People were encouraged to gain skills and become more independent.
“People received a person-centred service where they were at the heart and focus of the support provided.” from the report
Safety and staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines, risks, safeguarding concerns, accidents and recruitment were managed safely.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff supported people warmly and respectfully. People were given privacy and encouraged to do tasks for themselves.
“Staff treated people with kindness and warmth.” from the report
Communication and activities
Staff understood how people communicated, including signs of choice, pain or distress. People could use pictures, easy-read information and communication aids.
“Staff understood how people communicated. They knew how people expressed themselves, so understood when people indicated their choices, were in pain or were becoming distressed.” from the report
Improved management
The home had improved its training monitoring and quality checks since the last inspection. The previous Regulation 17 breach was no longer in place.
“At this inspection sufficient improvement had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of Regulation 17.” from the report
One late DoLS application
needs fixingA new application for one person was submitted three days after the previous authorisation had expired. The manager identified the error and introduced a monitoring system.
“A new application for one person was submitted three days after the previous one had expired.” from the report
- 01How do you monitor DoLS authorisation dates so applications are made before an authorisation expires?
- 02How will you keep my relative's communication needs and preferred ways of making choices up to date?
- 03How often are medicines checked and what happens if an error is found?
- 04How will you measure my relative's progress with daily living skills and personal goals?
- 05How are relatives involved in reviewing support plans and raising concerns?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care and the premises; people could not communicate verbally with the inspector, so feedback included two relatives, staff and observations. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 April 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.
Every inspection of Tynedale
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 December 2010.
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
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Sunderland
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 £950 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.