CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Yorklea Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, current risk assessments and good infection control. Two call alarms were out of reach, but this was corrected immediately.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received appropriate health support, food and drink assessments, staff training and regular contact with health professionals. Staff supported people's choices and followed the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not fully inspected during this visit. The previous Good rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences, and people had choice in their daily routines. Activities were limited while the home had a vacancy for an activities worker.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers used audits, checks and feedback to monitor quality. Inspectors found an open culture, supportive management and evidence that the home acted on lessons from investigations.
What inspectors found, December 2021
Yorklea Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and well-managed care, but activities were limited at the time.
Inspectors visited on 26 October 2021. They spoke with eight people, four relatives, nine staff and health and social care professionals. They also checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led were each rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, good cleanliness and infection control, personalised care, and strong links with health services.
There were some limits. An activities worker vacancy meant people had fewer activities and less social stimulation. Two call alarms were out of reach, but the manager dealt with this immediately. The home said it had recruited an activities worker soon after the inspection.
This was a focused inspection of four questions. Caring was not inspected in full, so its previous Good rating was used. The inspection was prompted partly by a serious incident, but inspectors did not examine what happened and found no evidence that people were at risk from the wound-care concern they reviewed.
Staffing and safety
Inspectors found enough staff to provide safe and person-centred care. Recruitment checks were also in good order.
“The people we spoke with confirmed there were enough staff to provide appropriate care and support.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Managers carried out audits and competency checks.
“We reviewed four people's medicines records. Staff completed medicines administration records fully and accurately.” from the report
Cleanliness and infection control
The home had high standards of cleanliness and hygiene. Staff had infection-control training and used protective equipment safely.
“The care home had very good standards of cleanliness and hygiene.” from the report
Personalised care
Staff knew people's preferences and supported choice in daily routines, meals and personal care.
“The service involved people, their relatives and health and social care professionals to develop personalised care plans that accurately reflected people's needs and preferences.” from the report
Learning and oversight
The provider investigated concerns, acted on recommendations and used audits and mock inspections to identify improvements.
“The provider showed a strong commitment to learning lessons and continuous improvement.” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingThe vacancy for an activities worker meant some people had limited activities and social stimulation. The home said it had recruited someone soon after the inspection.
“At the time of our inspection, the home had a vacancy for an activities worker, which explained the limited activities and social stimulation available to people.” from the report
Call alarms
minorTwo call alarms were out of people's reach. The manager addressed this during the inspection.
“However, we found two alarms that were out of people's reach. We informed the manager who addressed it immediately.” from the report
- 01Has the activities worker vacancy been filled, and what activities are now available for people who spend most of their time in their bedrooms?
- 02How do you check that call alarms are within reach for every person, including after rooms or equipment are changed?
- 03What changes were made to wound care, body mapping, photographs and nurse handovers after the serious incident?
- 04How do you make sure people who need high levels of care receive enough staff support during busy morning periods?
- 05When will the refurbishment be completed, including improvements to the second-floor shower room?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led; Caring was not fully inspected and its Good rating was carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 December 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.
What inspectors found, August 2020
Yorklea Nursing Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements for visitors and residents.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 August 2020. It formed part of a coronavirus pandemic review of infection prevention and control in care homes.
Inspectors found good practice at the entrance. Visitors were greeted, given information and personal protective equipment, and asked to complete a track and trace form. Temperatures were taken where appropriate.
The inspectors were assured about infection control in several areas. These included visitors, social distancing, admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, hygiene, outbreak management and the infection control policy.
The home was inspected but not rated. This visit looked only at infection prevention and control, so it does not provide an overall quality rating.
Visitor controls
The entrance had a dedicated area where visitors were greeted, given information and personal protective equipment, and asked to complete a track and trace form.
“There was a dedicated area at he entrance where a staff member greeted the visitor, took their temperature if appropriate, explained and provided PPE” from the report
Infection prevention
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements covering visitors, social distancing, admissions, testing, hygiene, outbreak management and its infection control policy.
“We were assured that the provider was meeting shielding and social distancing rules.” from the report
Safe use of PPE
Inspectors were assured that personal protective equipment was being used effectively and safely.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently greeted, given personal protective equipment and recorded for track and trace?
- 02How do you currently test people using the service and staff?
- 03What happens if there is an infection outbreak in the home?
- 04How do you make sure personal protective equipment is used effectively and safely?
- 05When was the infection prevention and control policy last updated?
This was a targeted thematic inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; no ratings were awarded for the other key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 August 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 Yorklea Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Manchester
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. 89 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the home.”
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.