You are here

Archived: Nazareth House - Southend Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 10 January 2020

About the service

Nazareth house is a care home supporting people who required residential and nursing care for up to 64 people over the age of 65. At this inspection, 30 people were living at the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

At the last inspection in April 2019, we found that people were at risk of harm and the service was placed in special measures. At this inspection we found that whilst there had been some improvement, people remained at risk of harm because systems, processes and staff, failed to identify people’s needs and presenting risks and take timely action.

Staff did not always adequately handover to other staff, people’s needs. Missing important information about risks and actions to prevent and mitigate these.

Medicines were managed safely, although for those on covert medications (Given without the person’s consent or knowledge and hidden in food or drink) staff had not always followed best practice guidance. We made a recommendation about this.

Staffing had improved because the scale of the service had reduced to three floors of one wing of the building. This meant staff were more responsive.

External stakeholders had expressed continued concerns about meal time experience for people. We saw that the registered manager had made efforts to improve this and remained a work in progress.

People were not always supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. However, staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests.

Staff had not received a values-based interview and opportunities were missed at the point of interview and within supervisions to identify additional training to ensure staff had the correct skills and values. We made a recommendation about this.

Although efforts had been made to ensure that all safety checks on potential staff had been carried out prior to employment there were missed opportunities at the recruitment stage to put in place training to meet potential staffs identified weaknesses. We made a recommendation about this

Staff were caring in how they supported people, but support was task orientated rather than person centred. People were not always asked how they would best like to live their lives.

Care plans had improved but continued to need improvement to ensure that they were person centred. We made a recommendation about this.

Oral hygiene care was sometimes poor for those who were not able to manage their needs without support. We made a recommendation about this.

People with access to communal areas had good opportunity for engagement and activity. But for those people cared for in their bedrooms this was poor. We made a recommendation about this.

People at the end of their life did not receive care in line with gold standards, which aims to ensure people are supported to plan ahead to live as well as possible right to the end of their lives.

The new registered manager had begun to make improvements at the service and had identified some of the concerns we found at this inspection.

People, relatives and staff were engaged with the service and the registered manager was visible. Staff told us they felt supported by managers.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection (and update)

The last rating for this service was inadequate (Published 5 June 2019).

Previous breaches

The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve.

At this inspection whilst some improvement had been made to the well led domain, enough improvement had not been made/ sustained in the safe domain and the provider was still in breach of regulations. The safe remains rated as Inadequate and therefore the service remains in special measures.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

We have found evidence that the provider ne

Inspection areas



Updated 10 January 2020

The service was not safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 10 January 2020

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 10 January 2020

The service was not always caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 10 January 2020

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 10 January 2020

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.