CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Abbeycliffe Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that medicines, risk assessments, staffing and recruitment were managed safely. Infection prevention arrangements were also found to be suitable.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was carried forward into the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was carried forward into the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed, personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported to choose how they spent their time and to take part in activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers had clearer responsibilities, regular audits and better oversight. People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the management and culture.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care and improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience visited on 19 January 2023. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a visiting professional. They also reviewed records, policies and information from other agencies.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Responsive and Well-led were rated Good. Inspectors found that medicines were now managed safely, staffing levels were suitable, care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed, and managers had better oversight.
The previous inspection in March 2020 rated the home Requires Improvement, with breaches relating to medicines and governance. Inspectors found enough improvement had been made and the home was no longer in breach of those regulations.
This inspection did not assess Effective or Caring. The overall rating used those ratings from the previous inspection, together with the new findings for Safe, Responsive and Well-led.
Safe medicines
Medicines were managed, administered, recorded and stored safely. Staff administering medicines were trained and checked for competence.
“Medicines were managed safely. People were supported by staff who followed systems and processes to prescribe, administer, record and store medicines safely.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's needs, choices and preferences. They were reviewed when people's needs changed, with people and relatives involved.
“Care plans were person centred and detailed. Care plans documented people's individual needs, choices and preferences.” from the report
Positive culture
Inspectors observed good interactions and found the atmosphere calm and homely. People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the home.
“People who lived at the service spoke positively and felt safe and supported. The atmosphere was very calm, and the environment was homely and completed to a high standard.” from the report
Choice and activities
People could choose how to spend their time. The home offered activities, entertainment, trips and changes made in response to residents' feedback.
“People spoke positively about activities at the home and were able to choose how they spent their time.” from the report
Improved oversight
Managers had an audit schedule and the nominated individual carried out monthly reviews. This was a clear improvement from the previous inspection.
“The management team had an audit schedule in place and carried out regular audits, including medication and the environment.” from the report
Medicine recording needed adjustment
minorInspectors found minor issues with recording creams and time-sensitive medicines. The manager changed the systems during the inspection and responded to further advice.
“Changes were made during the inspection to improve systems for recording creams and time sensitive medicines.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that creams and time-sensitive medicines are recorded correctly?
- 02How are my relative and our family involved in care plan reviews?
- 03What activities are available, and how can my relative choose whether to join them?
- 04How do residents and relatives give feedback, and how do you show that it has been acted on?
- 05What were the previous issues with medicines and governance, and how do you make sure those improvements continue?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led; Effective and Caring were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 February 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, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Inspectors visited the home on 5 March 2021. The visit was announced and focused on infection prevention and control because the home had experienced a coronavirus outbreak.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, social distancing, admissions, testing, protective equipment, hygiene and outbreaks safely. They also found that the infection control policy was up to date.
The home had created a visiting pod, supported people to isolate and placed protective equipment stations around the building. Staff observed during the visit wore protective equipment correctly.
This was a targeted inspection. The service was inspected but not rated, so it does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most of the five areas.
Safer visiting
The home created a visiting pod with its own external door and intercom to support visits during winter.
“A pod, with an external door and an intercom system, had been built into part of the lounge area to enable safe visiting by relatives over the winter.” from the report
Outbreak management
People were supported to isolate, and staff arrangements were used to reduce the risk of cross infection.
“People had been supported to isolate during the recent COVID-19 outbreak.” from the report
Protective equipment
Protective equipment was available throughout the home, and inspectors saw staff using it correctly.
“All staff we observed were wearing their PPE correctly.” from the report
Infection control checks
Staff had infection control training, and the registered manager and infection control champion checked protective equipment use and hand hygiene.
“Observations of the use of PPE and hand hygiene were completed by the registered manager and infection control champion.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visits arranged now, and is the visiting pod still being used?
- 02How do you manage isolation when someone tests positive or has been exposed to infection?
- 03How often do staff receive infection control and protective equipment training?
- 04How are protective equipment use and hand hygiene checked now?
- 05How do you keep testing arrangements and the infection control policy up to date?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; the service was inspected but not rated, and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 March 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 Abbeycliffe Residential Care Home
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Abbeycliffe Residential Care Home →
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Abbeycliffe Residential Care Home →
- March 2020Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 April 2013.
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 Bury
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. 94 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
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.