CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Arranmore Park Rest Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and there were enough staff. Medicines were managed safely overall, but the medicines fridge, some medicines records, risk assessments and accident records needed improvement.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received support from trained staff, had food and drink choices, and were supported to access health professionals. Some assessments needed more detail, and refurbishment was still taking place.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives were positive about the care. Staff were observed asking for consent, respecting privacy and dignity, and encouraging people to be involved in their care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- People's communication needs and end-of-life support were considered. Care plans were basic and being transferred to an electronic system, while activities were not clearly happening for everyone.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider and registered manager were described positively, and there was an open and person-centred culture. Some audits and statutory notifications were not complete or timely.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Arranmore Park Rest Home was rated Good overall, with kind and safe care but some records and activities needing improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 03 March 2022. The inspection team spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and communal areas, toured the building, and checked care files, staff records, medicines and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives said they felt safe and were positive about the care. Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, dignity and respect. Staffing, training, food, infection control and links with health professionals were also viewed positively.
There were still areas to improve. Risk assessments, accident records, medicines records, care plans, audits and complaint records did not always contain enough detail. Activities were not clearly taking place for everyone. The home had addressed medicines problems found under the previous provider, and refurbishment and electronic care records were ongoing.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe. Staff had completed safeguarding training, and inspectors found staffing numbers were sufficient.
“People and relatives told us they felt safe living in the service.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People, relatives and professionals gave positive feedback about the care. Staff were seen respecting privacy, asking permission and supporting independence.
“All of the people and relatives we spoke with were very positive about the care people received.” from the report
Good meals and nutrition support
People enjoyed the food and were offered choices. Inspectors saw a pleasant dining experience and found that nutritional needs were recorded.
“We observed a very positive dining experience.” from the report
Good communication and professional links
Relatives said they were kept informed, and professionals described good working relationships with the home. People were supported to communicate according to their needs.
“Generally if anything happens, we are informed straight away, the communication is excellent.” from the report
Risk and incident records
needs fixingRisk assessments and accident records were sometimes too brief. They did not always show the actions taken or lessons learned, so the provider was asked to improve its systems.
“Whilst these had some information to manage risks, they were brief and would benefit from more details to support the management of risks.” from the report
Activities were unclear
minorAn activities programme was displayed, but some people could not confirm that activities were taking place. One person said there were no activities, and the home was recruiting an activities co-ordinator.
“People were not able to confirm an activities programme was taking place.” from the report
- 01What specific changes have been made to risk assessments and accident records, and how do you share lessons learned with staff?
- 02How do you record people's personal preferences for taking medicines and the reasons for giving when-needed medicines?
- 03Have all care plans now been updated with detailed, individual information, and has the move to the electronic system been completed?
- 04What activities are currently available, how often do they take place, and how are people involved in choosing them?
- 05Have all audits and required notifications now been completed on time and followed up with clear action plans?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control and COVID-19 vaccination requirements. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 March 2022 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 Arranmore Park Rest Home
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2021Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 July 2021.
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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.