CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Yewtree Care Limited t/a Yewtree 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, June 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and improvements in records, healthcare coordination and management.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 13 and 15 June 2023, spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, and reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Well-led. Inspectors found that risks were recorded and reviewed, staffing and medicines systems were safe, and infection control arrangements were suitable. People received kind care, support with activities, and help to make choices.
The report says the home had improved since its previous inspection, when it was rated Requires Improvement and breached Regulation 17 on good governance. The provider was no longer in breach at this inspection.
This inspection did not reassess Caring or Responsive. The previous ratings for areas not inspected were used in calculating the overall rating.
Risk management
Care plans and risk assessments were more accurate and were reviewed regularly. Staff had clearer information when providing care.
“At this inspection, we found that risks were recorded accurately and monitored regularly.” from the report
Kind and individual care
People received compassionate support. Staff understood individual needs and supported choice, activities and positive risk-taking where appropriate.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff understood and responded to people's individual needs.” from the report
Healthcare coordination
The home worked more effectively with health professionals and kept better records of healthcare input and referrals.
“The introduction of a new electronic care system had allowed for an improved recording and monitoring of people's healthcare input.” from the report
Improved oversight
Management used audits to identify areas of good practice and areas needing improvement. Staff said communication and support from management had improved.
“The registered manager used audits to drive improvement.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you check that the electronic care records and risk assessments remain accurate and up to date?
- 02How do you monitor whether health referrals, professional visits and advice are acted on promptly?
- 03What audits are currently being used to maintain the improvements in governance and care records?
- 04What were the previous Caring and Responsive ratings, and what has changed in those areas since the last comprehensive inspection?
- 05How do you make sure staffing levels remain enough for people who need two staff or extra support at meals?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were used in the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 June 2023 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, July 2021
Yewtree Nursing Home was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found gaps in safety records, care reviews and oversight despite kind care and improved activities.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 18 and 19 May 2021. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was not always safe or effective. Records did not consistently show that people received planned repositioning support, risks were reviewed promptly, or care plans were kept up to date. Communication with healthcare professionals was not always timely, and some concerns were not acted on.
There were positive findings. People generally said staff were caring and supportive. The home was clean, medicines records were accurate, people had more activities than at the previous inspection, and the Responsive rating improved to Good.
The overall rating remained Requires Improvement, as did Safe, Effective and Well-led. Caring was not inspected, so its previous rating was used. The home had been rated Requires Improvement at the previous inspection and had held that rating for two consecutive inspections.
Kind and supportive staff
Most people and relatives spoke positively about the care. Inspectors observed staff engaging with people in a friendly and professional way.
“Very good and caring staff here. I have no complaints at all” from the report
Improved activities
More activity staff had been employed since the previous inspection. People in their rooms received regular one-to-one activities and people took part in group activities with enthusiasm.
“Records demonstrated a variety of activity for people in their rooms, including reading the paper or letters, completing word searches, watching films together or support with phone calls to friends and family.” from the report
Medicines support
Staff who administered medicines were trained and assessed as competent. Inspectors saw medicines being given respectfully, and the records showed medicines had been given as prescribed.
“Medicine Administration Records (MAR) were completed accurately and demonstrated people had received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Choice and mental capacity
People were asked about their choices and supported to make daily decisions. Capacity assessments, best interest decisions and appropriate applications for restrictions had improved since the previous inspection.
“We observed staff asking people for their choices throughout the day and encouraging them to make decisions, such as what to eat and what to do.” from the report
Incomplete safety records
seriousRepositioning records were missing or did not match care plans. This meant inspectors could not confirm that pressure damage risks had been monitored and managed.
“We could not verify that risks relating to pressure area care had been monitored and mitigated to keep people safe.” from the report
Risks and referrals not always acted on promptly
seriousA concern about an unsafe transfer was not picked up and acted on quickly. Communication with healthcare professionals was also not always timely or joined up.
“The system to ensure risks were reviewed and mitigated in a timely way was not robust.” from the report
Weak governance and record keeping
seriousThe provider remained in breach because audits had not ensured consistently accurate care records or safe care. A new electronic system was planned, but its effect had not yet been checked.
“The lack of an effective system to ensure quality and safety at the service placed people at risk of harm.” from the report
Mixed staff communication and support
needs fixingSome staff did not feel supported or confident that management would act on concerns. Inspectors said this culture needed improvement because staff morale can affect people's quality of life.
“The communication here between staff and managers really needs to improve” from the report
Duty of candour record missing
needs fixingThe provider had apologised after a safeguarding enquiry, but the written record showing how the incident and communication had been handled was not available.
“At the time of the inspection this was not available.” from the report
- 01How are you now checking that repositioning and other planned care tasks are recorded accurately and completed on time?
- 02What has changed since the inspection to make sure risks, including moving and handling risks, are reviewed promptly?
- 03How do nurses record and follow up visits and advice from healthcare professionals?
- 04Has the electronic care planning system been introduced and trained staff on, and what evidence shows that it has improved records and communication?
- 05How are staff now able to raise concerns informally, and how do managers show that concerns are acted on?
This was a focused inspection that included Safe and reviews of Effective, Responsive and Well-led; Caring was not inspected and its previous rating was carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 July 2021 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 Yewtree Care Limited t/a Yewtree Nursing Home
5 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Yewtree Care Limited t/a Yewtree Nursing Home →
- July 2021Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Yewtree Care Limited t/a Yewtree Nursing Home →
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2020Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
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 £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.