CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Blackley Premier Care
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control was managed safely. They found arrangements covering visitors, protective equipment, testing, hygiene, social distancing and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, October 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control was being managed safely.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 14 October 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found several good practices. These included separate arrangements for essential visitors, outdoor family visits by appointment, screening at the entrance, access to protective equipment and sanitiser, and plans for managing isolation and outbreaks.
The inspectors said they were assured about infection control, including the use of protective equipment, testing, social distancing, hygiene and outbreak planning. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Visitor safety
The home had screening, temperature checks, protective equipment and sanitiser at the entrance. It also had separate arrangements for essential visits and outdoor visits from relatives.
“Visitors completed a screening questionnaire and had their temperatures checked on arrival.” from the report
Outbreak planning
There was an isolation policy and a detailed pandemic business continuity plan. The plan covered outbreaks, staff or manager loss, lockdown and essential supplies.
“The home had a pandemic-specific business continuity plan that was comprehensive and easy to read.” from the report
Support for distressed residents
Staff used a familiar member of staff to reassure residents who became frightened or distressed during coronavirus testing.
“another staff member familiar to the resident stood at a safe distance (not wearing a mask) to talk through the procedure and reassure the resident.” from the report
Infection control oversight
The home had a named infection control champion among its staff to oversee infection control practice.
“The home had an infection control champion among its staff group who oversaw infection control practice at the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Has the planned separate Covid-safe visiting unit in the conservatory been created, and how are visits arranged now?
- 02How are new residents admitted safely and tested for infections?
- 03How often are staff and residents tested, and what happens if someone tests positive?
- 04Who is currently responsible for overseeing infection prevention and control?
- 05What is the current plan for managing an outbreak, staff shortages or a lockdown?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not assess the other four quality questions or provide a service rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 October 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, February 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with a few areas needing attention.
This was an unannounced inspection on 31 January 2019. Inspectors spoke with six people living at the home, one relative, staff and a visiting health professional. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicines, staffing, complaints, safety records and audits.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, kind and respectful care, personalised plans and good links with healthcare professionals.
There were some issues to follow up. The home did not yet have a Legionella risk assessment, the manager was not aware of an upcoming food-texture framework, and survey results were not summarised for people. The report says the overall Good rating continued from the previous inspection in September 2016.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw positive interactions and found that staff knew people's likes, dislikes and individual needs.
“Staff were kind and caring and treated people with respect. We observed many positive and caring interactions throughout the inspection.” from the report
Safe medicines
People received medicines when needed. Staff had competency checks and the home had systems for administering, storing and disposing of medicines.
“There were robust systems in place to manage, administer, store and dispose of medicines.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's needs and preferences, including communication, faith and end-of-life wishes. They were reviewed regularly.
“Care plans continued to be informative and personalised, and they were reviewed regularly.” from the report
Legionella assessment missing
seriousThere was no Legionella risk assessment when inspectors visited. The home had carried out water testing and temperature checks, and an external provider was due to complete the assessment in February 2019.
“The provider did not have a risk assessment in relation to Legionella.” from the report
Food-texture change not yet understood
needs fixingThe manager was not aware of the upcoming IDDSI food and drink texture framework. The home said it would consider this as a priority and seek training from a speech and language therapist.
“The registered manager was not aware of this change but provided us with assurances IDDSI would be considered as a priority for the service.” from the report
Survey feedback was not shared
minorThe home collected views from people, relatives and professionals but did not produce a summary explaining what it had done with the feedback.
“However, we noted the provider did not produce a summary once surveys were analysed to inform people what the home did with their feedback.” from the report
- 01Was the Legionella risk assessment completed in February 2019, and what did it identify?
- 02How do you now manage food and drink textures for people who may have swallowing difficulties?
- 03What training have staff received about the IDDSI framework?
- 04How do you share the results of surveys with residents and relatives, and show what has changed?
- 05How do you use the dependency tool to check that staffing levels remain right for people's needs?
This was an unannounced inspection of all five CQC questions, involving observations, discussions and checks of care, staffing, medicines, safety and governance records. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 February 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 Blackley Premier Care
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 July 2011.
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 Manchester
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. 89 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.