CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Bankfield House Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 20 April 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, rather than the full range of care quality.
Inspectors found additional staff training on infection control, PPE and hand washing. They also found controlled visiting arrangements, safe admissions, regular testing, cleaning schedules and suitable hygiene measures.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a full rating for all five areas of care.
Staff infection control training
Staff had extra training on infection control, PPE and hand washing. Inspectors observed staff wearing appropriate PPE.
“Staff had received additional training on infection control, the safe use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and hand washing.” from the report
Managed visits
Visitors could meet relatives in designated areas. They had to take a rapid COVID-19 test and use the home's PPE before entering.
“Visitors had to undergo a rapid Covid-19 test and wear the home's PPE before being allowed on the premises.” from the report
Testing and cleaning
The home had weekly staff testing, checks before shifts, extra cleaning schedules and hygiene stations around the building.
“All staff received weekly Covid-19 swab testing and were also required to have a rapid lateral flow test” from the report
Safe admissions
Inspectors found that guidance was followed when new people were admitted. Staff provided extra interaction and reassurance to help reduce isolation.
“The service followed guidance on the admission of new people to the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What is the home's current overall CQC rating, since this inspection was not rated?
- 02Are weekly staff COVID-19 tests and pre-shift lateral flow tests still required?
- 03How are visits currently managed, including testing, PPE and visiting areas?
- 04What procedures are now used when a new person is admitted?
- 05How often are additional cleaning schedules and hygiene stations reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not assess the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 May 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, December 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care and clear improvements since the previous inspection, with a few recording and staffing points to check.
The inspection was unannounced and took place over two days. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a visiting professional. They also reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found caring and trained staff, person-centred care plans, good activities, timely healthcare support and regular checks on safety and quality.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement, with three breaches of regulation. The provider had completed an action plan, and inspectors found enough improvement had been made. The home was no longer in breach of regulations at this inspection.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff supporting people attentively and respectfully. People were involved in care and their privacy was protected.
“People received support from caring and well-trained staff. Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised care plans
Care plans included people's choices, routines, medicines preferences and cultural needs. People and those important to them were involved in planning care.
“Care plans were inclusive and person-centred and written with full involvement of people and those important to them.” from the report
Activities and community links
The home had two activities co-ordinators, a full activity programme and links with community groups. It also had a mini-bus for trips out.
“The service had made close links with other groups in the community and they came into the home regularly.” from the report
Improvement since the last inspection
Training, supervision, mental capacity safeguards and quality monitoring had improved. The provider was no longer in breach of the regulations identified at the previous inspection.
“At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.” from the report
Some people experienced waits
minorStaffing numbers were judged suitable, but feedback from people was mixed. Some people said they waited for carers, so ask how quickly help is provided when someone uses the call buzzer.
“We do wait for carers." And "The staff can't be everywhere at once.” from the report
Medicine records needed greater accuracy
minorInspectors found discrepancies in recording where two people's skin patches were applied. The manager said the patches had been given correctly and introduced a new recording form.
“We found discrepancies with the recording of the location site of two people's skin patches.” from the report
Oral care follow-up
minorSome toothbrushes checked during the inspection were dry. The manager said staff knew oral care was required and would follow this up.
“During the morning of the inspection, we checked a number of people's toothbrushes and found some of them to be dry.” from the report
Some records were disorganised
minorThe home's audit files were slightly disorganised. The manager said this would be corrected immediately.
“The audit files were slightly disorganised, and the manager told us they would rectify this immediately.” from the report
Laundry layout could be improved
minorThe laundry was clean and well managed, but inspectors discussed changing its layout to keep clean and dirty flows clearly separate.
“We spoke with the manager about future considerations for a reconfiguration of the laundry area to ensure a clear segregation of a clean and dirty flow.” from the report
- 01How quickly do staff respond when someone uses the call buzzer, especially at busy times?
- 02What checks are now used to make sure skin patch locations and other medicine records are accurate?
- 03How was the follow-up on people's oral care completed after the inspection?
- 04Has the audit filing system been reorganised, and how are action plans monitored?
- 05Has the new manager completed their registration with the CQC?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, following the previous Requires Improvement rating and three earlier breaches. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 December 2019 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 Bankfield House Care Home
5 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- August 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 December 2010.
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 Stockport
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. 88 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.