CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Bannister Farm Cottage
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found good systems for managing risks, safeguarding people, medicines, staffing and infection control. Staff reviewed incidents and reassessed people's needs.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found improved leadership, a calmer culture, clearer communication and effective audits. This rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
What inspectors found, July 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe care and stronger leadership, but this visit only checked safety and leadership.
This was an announced, focused inspection on 2 June 2021. One inspector spoke with two relatives, four employees and the registered manager. They also checked the building, care and medicine records, staffing, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found risk checks, safeguarding training, safe medicines systems, enough staff and suitable infection control measures. Relatives said people were safe, settled and treated as individuals.
Leadership improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection to Good. The inspection was prompted by concerns about risk management, environmental safety, comfort, staff training, supporting behaviour and leadership. Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from these concerns.
Risk management
The manager regularly checked the environment and staff reviewed incidents to learn lessons and reassess people's needs.
“The registered manager regularly checked the environment and had multiple control measures to reduce the risk of unsafe care.” from the report
Staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs promptly. Recruitment checks included employment history, references and criminal checks.
“The registered manager maintained sufficient staffing levels to ensure people's needs were constantly met with a timely approach.” from the report
Respect and independence
Staff supported people to make decisions and maintained their privacy, independence and individuality.
“Staff were consistently kind and respectful, ensuring each person maintained their independence and privacy.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had measures for preventing and managing infection outbreaks, including safe use of protective equipment and testing.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Improved leadership
The management team had improved teamwork, communication and oversight. Inspectors said the previous recommendation about closed cultures and management practice had been acted on.
“The current management team worked closely with the workforce to develop stronger bonds and gain more insight into people's needs.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you record and review incidents, and what changes have been made as a result?
- 02How do you make sure staffing levels remain sufficient when people are out or staff are absent?
- 03How often are staff medicines training and competency checks reviewed?
- 04How would you manage a new infection outbreak, including visiting professionals and visits from relatives?
- 05What audits do managers complete, and how will you tell families about any further improvements?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings came from previous comprehensive inspections and were not checked during this visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 July 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, February 2020
Rated Good overall, but inspectors found the home was not always well-led because some staff did not feel respected or able to raise concerns.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 23 January 2020. One inspector reviewed care, medicines, staff recruitment and management records, visited the home and spoke with staff, managers, relatives and health professionals. The inspector could not speak directly with residents because of the complexity of their needs and to prevent distress.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective, caring and responsive care. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, received their medicines safely and had care plans that described their needs. Staff supported people with activities, communication, healthcare, choice and independence. Relatives gave positive feedback about the care and said people were safe.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for well-led. Some staff said they did not feel valued, respected or able to raise concerns without fear of reprisals. The provider was told to consider guidance on closed cultures and management practices. The overall rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection, but the well-led rating remained Requires Improvement.
Safety and medicines
Inspectors found robust arrangements for safeguarding, risk management, recruitment and medicines. The home also monitored the use of antipsychotic medicines.
“People received their medicines when they should. Staff had received training in medicines management and regular checks had been carried out to monitor the medicines.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff supported people in a calm and respectful way. People were treated with dignity and their privacy and independence were maintained.
“People were supported by caring and respectful staff. Relatives we spoke with gave positive feedback and were complimentary to the caring nature of the staff team.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records contained detailed information about people's needs, preferences and behaviour. Staff used this information to provide individual support.
“People's records contained detailed behavioural support plans which were comprehensive and provided precise guidance on how best to support people and what works for them.” from the report
Activities and community life
People were supported to take part in activities at home and in the community. This included day trips, work experience, volunteering and supported holidays.
“There was a strong emphasis on ensuring people had access to activities and engagement in the home and the local community.” from the report
Management culture
seriousSome staff did not feel respected or able to raise concerns without fear of reprisals. Inspectors warned that this could contribute to a closed culture and recommended action.
“Some staff felt their contributions were not respected and that the management team did not always treat staff with respect.” from the report
End-of-life wishes
needs fixingAlthough end-of-life information was recorded, people and relatives had not been given the opportunity to discuss and express their wishes. The manager said they would seek support and training.
“We found people and their relatives had not been given the opportunity to express their wishes.” from the report
Restraint training
needs fixingConcerns about staff training in physical restraint had been addressed before the inspection. However, some staff had been at the home for more than three months without receiving this training.
“We discussed the need for staff to be provided with this training in a timely manner as some staff had been at the service for more than three months and not trained.” from the report
- 01What have you done since the inspection to make sure staff can raise concerns safely and without fear of reprisals?
- 02How do you check that all staff have completed physical restraint training before they need to use it?
- 03How will you help residents and relatives discuss and record their end-of-life wishes?
- 04How can relatives share concerns with the manager, and how will the home show that concerns have been acted on?
- 05How are care plans and behavioural support plans reviewed when a person's needs or preferences change?
This was an unannounced planned inspection of all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home environment; the previous overall rating was Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 February 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 Bannister Farm Cottage
6 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2019Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2018Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- February 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 August 2014.
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.