CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Butler House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found safe staffing and recruitment, trained staff, safe medicine systems and arrangements for managing risks and infection. They also found clutter and unsuitable laundry use in parts of the home, which could create accident risks.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before they stayed, with detailed transition plans. Staff had relevant training and supported people's nutrition, healthcare, independence and choices.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Inspectors observed calm, friendly and respectful interactions, with people encouraged to express their views and make decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and reviewed with people and families. People were supported with communication, activities, community involvement and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers used audits, including weekly medicine audits, to oversee the service. Staff felt supported, and people and relatives were encouraged to give feedback.
What inspectors found, October 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some clutter and unsuitable laundry use needing attention.
This was the home's first planned inspection, carried out on 14 September 2021 by one inspector. The inspector spoke with people living there, a relative, staff and managers, and checked care, medicine, recruitment, maintenance and quality records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, good medicine checks, suitable support for health and nutrition, and staff who treated people with kindness and respect.
People were supported to make choices, stay independent and take part in activities such as fishing, walking, shopping and college. However, some areas were cluttered and part of a communal area was being used for laundry, which could cause accidents. The provider was asked to review whether the premises were suitable and safe.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw caring and sensitive interactions. People and relatives said staff treated them well.
“We observed staff interact with people in a caring and sensitive manner.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were encouraged to make choices, take positive risks and join activities they enjoyed.
“The management team had promoted people's independence within a risk framework.” from the report
Safe medicines systems
Staff were trained to give medicines safely, and weekly audits were used to identify and deal with discrepancies.
“They trained staff and regularly checked medication administration was safe and act on any discrepancies through their auditing systems, which were completed weekly.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected individual needs, preferences and communication requirements. Families were involved in developing and reviewing support.
“Care support plans were person centred and ensured the individual and family were involved in the development and review of their plan as far as possible.” from the report
Clutter and laundry arrangements
seriousSome parts of the home were cluttered, and a communal area was being used for laundry. Inspectors said this could create a risk of accidents and recommended a review of the premises.
“We found parts of the home were cluttered and presented a risk of accidents, in addition part of the communal area was being used inappropriately for laundry.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to remove the clutter and move laundry out of the communal area?
- 02How do you now check that the building remains safe and suitable for people living here?
- 03How will you support my relative to make their own choices and take part in activities they enjoy?
- 04How often are medicines audited, and how are any discrepancies dealt with?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in developing and reviewing their care plan?
This was a planned first inspection covering all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control, so there were no previous ratings to carry over. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 October 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.
Every inspection of Butler House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- October 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 June 2020.
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.