CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Cherry Tree Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, January 2023
Requires Improvement; inspectors found unsafe medicines management and weak risk and quality checks, despite enough staff and respectful care.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 6 and 9 December 2022, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records and management records.
The home was not always safe. Medicines records were incomplete and medicines were not always stored, given or checked safely. Some risks were not properly identified or recorded, including risks linked to health conditions, weight management and bedrails.
The home was also not well-led. Its quality checks had not found the problems inspectors identified. The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection, published in December 2019, to Requires Improvement.
Enough staff
Inspectors found that recruitment checks were completed and enough staff were available to meet people's needs.
“Enough staff were deployed to meet the needs of people. People told us they did not have to wait to be supported.” from the report
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe and were treated respectfully. The home had a warm and friendly atmosphere.
“People told us they felt safe and staff treated them with respect.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infection, including safe use of protective equipment.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Safeguarding and safety checks
Staff had safeguarding training, concerns were investigated, and regular health and safety checks were carried out.
“Safeguarding concerns were investigated and reported to the appropriate authorities.” from the report
Medicines were not managed safely
seriousRecords for medicines were inaccurate or incomplete. Staff did not always record times, variable doses, reasons for giving 'when required' medicines or whether they worked.
“Medicine record keeping was inaccurate and incomplete.” from the report
Risks were not always controlled
seriousCare plans contained inaccurate or missing information. Inspectors found problems with weight calculations and some best-interest decisions about bedrails were not in place.
“Risks to people had not always been recognised and mitigated.” from the report
Quality checks missed problems
seriousThe provider's monitoring systems did not identify important problems with medicines, care records and risk management.
“The provider did not have effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality and safety of the home.” from the report
Worn areas
minorInspectors found worn chairs and some bare wood on handrails on the first floor. The provider had an action plan to address this.
“The 1st floor had worn chairs and some bare wood on handrails.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to medicines recording, storage, stock checks and 'when required' medicine protocols?
- 02Have all residents' risk assessments and care plans been checked for inaccurate or missing information?
- 03How have weight monitoring calculations and referrals been reviewed since the inspection?
- 04What evidence can you show that your quality checks now identify problems with medicines, care records and risk management?
- 05What progress has been made with replacing worn chairs and repairing bare wood on handrails?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings carried over from the previous inspection and were used to calculate the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 January 2023 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, November 2020
Cherry Tree Care Centre was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were being followed.
Inspectors visited on 5 November 2020 as part of a coronavirus infection prevention and control review. The visit was announced.
They found systems for screening visitors, social distancing, shielding and isolating people during outbreaks. There were supplies of protective equipment, staff training and regular Covid testing for people using the home and staff.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report gives an opinion about infection control only and does not give an overall quality rating.
Visitor infection controls
Visitors were screened before entering, with systems intended to reduce the spread of infection.
“We were assured that the provider was preventing visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
Social distancing and outbreak planning
Staff practised social distancing, and the home had arrangements to shield and isolate people if an outbreak occurred.
“We were assured that the provider was meeting shielding and social distancing rules.” from the report
Protective equipment
The home had enough protective equipment and staff received regular training on infection control and its use.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Testing
People living in the home and staff were regularly taking part in the Covid testing programme.
“We were assured that the provider was accessing testing for people using the service and staff.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors screened before entering the home now?
- 02What arrangements are in place to shield or isolate people if there is an infection outbreak?
- 03How do you make sure there is enough protective equipment and that staff use it safely?
- 04How often are people living here and staff offered infection testing?
- 05How are new residents admitted safely?
This was an announced thematic review of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 November 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 Cherry Tree Care Centre
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- January 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2019GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 December 2018.
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
45 live-in carers within about an hour of Stockton-on-Tees
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 £1,190 a week. 40 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“I found Alison to be kind , caring helpful concencious... Alison has a heart of gold”
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.