CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Adel Manor Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed, safeguarding systems were understood, medicines were managed safely, and infection control arrangements were in place. Staffing was enough to meet needs safely during the inspection, but deployment and call bell response needed attention.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- People's care and support did not always achieve consistent good outcomes. Call bells sometimes took longer than five minutes, people had mixed involvement in care planning, and some reported concerns about food temperature, portion sizes and suitable cultural choices.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw kind and caring interactions and found that privacy, dignity, independence and choice were generally promoted. However, some people said staff rushed care or seemed indifferent, and cultural needs were not always met.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's needs, preferences and communication needs. Activities and relationships were supported, although some people said activities were not suitable for everyone or did not include people in their rooms.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team used audits, meetings and an electronic care system to monitor quality and learn from incidents. There was no registered manager in post at the inspection, but a new manager had applied for registration and CQC was assessing the application.
What inspectors found, March 2024
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe and caring support, but effectiveness requires improvement.
This was the home's first inspection. It was unannounced and took place over three visits. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, medicines were managed safely, healthcare was available, and staff generally treated people with kindness and respect.
Effectiveness was rated Requires Improvement. People had mixed experiences of call bell response times, food quality and cultural food choices. Some people also said staff could seem rushed or indifferent. Inspectors made three recommendations about staff interactions, call bell response and staff deployment, and the dining experience.
This was the first inspection since the service was registered. A new manager had been in post for seven months and was applying to become registered with CQC.
Risk and safeguarding
People's risks were assessed and staff understood how to manage them. Inspectors found safeguarding concerns had been identified and acted on appropriately.
“People's risks had been identified and assessed. We found staff understood the actions they needed to take to manage people's individual risks to maintain people's safety.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were given safely and staff used personalised approaches for medicines with special instructions. There was no evidence of over-medication for anxiety.
“Information to support staff to safely give 'when required' medicines were in place and was person centred.” from the report
Choice and independence
Staff encouraged people to make choices and supported independence. Inspectors saw staff helping people with mobility while keeping their aids accessible.
“People were encouraged to make choices for themselves.” from the report
Healthcare support
People were supported to see healthcare professionals when needed. The home worked with GPs and community nursing teams.
“People were supported to access healthcare professionals when needed.” from the report
Call bell delays and staff deployment
needs fixingSome people said call bells were not answered quickly, with one person reporting waits of 30 to 35 minutes. Inspectors recommended reviewing staff deployment and call bell times.
“It can vary how long it takes to respond, when I press the call bell. It can take 30-35 minutes sometimes to be attended” from the report
Food experience
needs fixingSome people said food was cold and portions were small. Cultural options and some dietary requirements were not always provided, so inspectors recommended improvements.
“The food is not very good. It is often cold and not very much of it either.” from the report
Staff interactions
needs fixingAlthough inspectors saw kindness, some people felt rushed and said some staff could be indifferent. The home was asked to look at how care and support were provided.
“They always appear to be in a rush to get out of the room.” from the report
Registered manager
needs fixingThere was no registered manager in post when inspectors visited. The new manager had applied to register, and CQC was assessing the application.
“At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01How long do call bells usually take to be answered now, and how do you check this?
- 02How do you deploy staff when people are admitted or discharged at short notice?
- 03What changes have been made to food temperature, portion sizes and cultural meal choices?
- 04How do you make sure staff provide care without rushing people?
- 05What is the current position on the manager's CQC registration application?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering all five CQC questions, with additional checks on medicines and infection prevention; the report says the service supported 30 discharge-to-assess or transitional beds. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 March 2024 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 Adel Manor Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- March 2024Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 April 2022.
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 Leeds
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 £1,250 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.