CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Abbeydale Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks, including PPE, testing, social distancing, cleaning, admissions and visitors. This was not a rated assessment of safety overall.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during a targeted COVID-19 inspection.
Inspectors visited the home on 9 March 2021. The visit was announced and focused only on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
They found the home clean, uncluttered and well maintained. Staff used personal protective equipment appropriately, COVID-19 testing was taking place, and social distancing and cleaning arrangements were in place.
The home had restricted visits in line with local guidance. Staff helped people keep in touch with relatives and friends by telephone, window visits and video calls. A plan was in place for safer visits under updated government guidance.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other four questions.
Clean and maintained environment
The premises were clean, uncluttered and well maintained. Cleaning schedules were used and monitored by the registered manager.
“The premises were clean, un-cluttered and well-maintained. Amendments had been made to the environment to allow social distancing.” from the report
PPE and testing
Staff used PPE appropriately and COVID-19 testing was being carried out in line with good practice guidance.
“Tests for COVID-19 were being carried out in line with good practice guidance.” from the report
Contact with relatives
When visits were restricted, staff supported people to keep in touch with relatives and friends through calls, window visits and video calls. A safe visiting plan was ready for updated guidance.
“During this time staff had been supporting people to stay in contact with their relatives and friends via telephone calls, window visits and the use of IT technology such as on-line video calls.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control measures are still in place now?
- 02How are visits currently arranged, and what happens if there is an infection outbreak?
- 03How often are people living at the home and staff tested for COVID-19 or other infections?
- 04Can you show how cleaning is scheduled and checked?
- 05Where can I find the home's more recent full inspection rating and reports?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 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.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Abbeydale Nursing Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but the environment meant Effective required improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 3 and 4 December 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They also reviewed care records, medicines records, recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were rated Good. Staff were described as kind and respectful, and inspectors found that people received personalised care, had their medicines managed safely and were supported to make choices.
Effective was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found problems with parts of the building and furnishings, including old flooring, paintwork, chairs and a shower room. A programme of redecoration was under way. The overall rating had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
Safe medicines management
Inspectors checked three people's medicines records and found them complete. Medicine stocks, including controlled drugs, were correct and staff had training and competency checks.
“The provider now had systems in place to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff had built genuine relationships with people and respected their privacy, dignity, choices and independence.
“Staff had formed genuine relationships with people, knew them well and were caring and respectful towards people and their wishes.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's preferences, likes, dislikes and areas of independence. Staff showed inspectors that they knew people as individuals.
“Person-centred care plans contained specific individual details about people and how they wanted support.” from the report
Improved management oversight
The home had developed audits, checks and handovers to identify issues and follow up actions. The well-led rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good.
“The registered manager completed a range of audits and checks on a regular basis; audits of medicines had improved and plans were in place to address any issues identified during this monitoring process.” from the report
Condition of parts of the building
needs fixingInspectors found insecure toilet locks, old chairs, old paintwork and flooring, and an old, unkempt shower enclosure. The garden also needed work to make it accessible and safe.
“Some improvements were needed to the home environment.Two toilets had insecure locks and some old chairs needing replacing to help prevent the spread of infection.” from the report
Activities did not suit everyone
minorSome people said they did not like the activities available and had not joined in. Inspectors raised this with management.
“However, some people told us they did not like the activities on offer and had not taken part in them.” from the report
- 01Which of the environmental issues found in the report have now been repaired or replaced?
- 02How will you make sure the garden is safe and accessible for my relative?
- 03What activities are now available for people who did not enjoy the activities offered at the inspection?
- 04How will you keep checking medicines records and medicine storage?
- 05How will you review my relative's care plan as their needs and preferences change?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that covered all five CQC questions, following the previous Requires Improvement rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 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 Abbeydale Nursing Home
8 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2018Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- May 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- September 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2015Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2015Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 March 2012.
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 Salford
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. 90 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.