CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Bickham House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place. This included visitor safety, social distancing, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- 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, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control arrangements were safe during the coronavirus outbreak.
This was a targeted inspection on 20 November 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control because of the coronavirus outbreak response.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, distancing, shielding, protective equipment, testing, cleanliness and possible outbreaks. They also found the infection control policy was up to date.
The report gives no quality rating. It records the service as inspected but not rated, so it should not be read as a Good or Outstanding rating.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infections, including possible outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Protective equipment
Inspectors found that protective equipment was being used effectively and safely.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Clean and ventilated environment
The home was clean and well ventilated in line with good practice.
“The home was clean and well ventilated in line with good practice.” from the report
Support for wellbeing
People continued to receive one-to-one activities and support for their wellbeing.
“Staff supported people with their wellbeing. Activities continued on a one to one basis with people.” from the report
Handwashing checks
Managers carried out monthly checks on staff handwashing to help maintain good practice.
“The management team completed monthly handwashing audits of staff.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently prevented from catching or spreading infections?
- 02How are protective equipment, testing and social distancing arrangements checked now?
- 03What is the current plan for managing an infection outbreak?
- 04Are monthly handwashing audits still being completed, and what happens if they find a problem?
- 05How are one-to-one activities and wellbeing support being provided now?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas of care were not assessed in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 December 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.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some safety and modified-diet improvements still in progress.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 25 July 2019. One inspector spoke with four people living at the home, two relatives, seven staff and two visiting health professionals. The inspector also reviewed care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives said they felt safe and well cared for. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems, suitable training, personalised care plans and good access to health professionals.
Inspectors also found a kind and respectful staff team. People were supported to make choices, stay as independent as possible, join activities and receive sensitive end-of-life care. Some improvements were still underway, including raising a stair bannister, moving gloves from a public area and improving monitoring of thickeners used in modified diets.
The previous inspection, published on 9 January 2017, also rated the home Good. This inspection found that all five ratings remained Good.
Enough staff
People, relatives and staff said there were enough staff on duty. People did not usually have to wait long for help.
“Staffing levels were good. People, relatives and staff told us there were always enough staff on duty.” from the report
Kind care
People and relatives described the staff team as kind, patient, respectful and caring. Inspectors observed respectful conversations and support for people's independence.
“People and their relatives told us they were treated well by kind, patient, respectful and caring staff.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's preferences, routines, risks and the way they wanted to be supported. Relatives were involved in care reviews.
“The plans gave detailed information to staff about how the person needed to be cared for, taking into account, the person's preferences” from the report
Activities and relationships
People had activities at the home and outside it, while staff respected those who preferred to spend time in their rooms. Families and friends were encouraged to visit.
“We saw people went to the local park and were able to join in a range of activities at the home including, arts and crafts, arm chairs exercises and a choir session.” from the report
Good management oversight
The management team was visible and approachable. Audits covered areas including care records, falls, medicines, health and safety and infection control.
“The registered manager and provider completed audits to monitor and improve the service.” from the report
Stair bannister work
needs fixingA bannister on an upper staircase was being raised to reduce risk. Ask whether this work has been completed and how the area is kept safe.
“Work was underway to raise the height of a bannister to reduce risk on an upper staircase.” from the report
Gloves in a public area
minorInspectors asked the manager to move gloves from a public area to improve safety.
“We asked the registered manager to move gloves from a public area to improve safety.” from the report
Presentation of soft diets
minorThe home was trying new ways to make soft diets look more appetising. Ask how people's food choices and nutritional needs are now being managed.
“The home was improving the way they presented soft diets and were experimenting with new ways to ensure food looked more appetising.” from the report
- 01Has the upper-staircase bannister been raised, and what checks are now in place to reduce the risk there?
- 02How are thickeners for people with modified diets monitored now?
- 03How does the home make sure soft diets are safe, nutritious and appetising for each person?
- 04How would you support my relative's particular risks, such as falls, choking, malnutrition or mobility difficulties?
- 05How are relatives involved when care needs change or when end-of-life plans are reviewed?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at the premises and care and reviewed all five CQC questions; all five ratings were Good and carried over as Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 August 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 Bickham House
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 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 Trafford
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. 91 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.