CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Cherry Trees Resource Centre
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about most infection prevention and control arrangements. They were only somewhat assured about some hygiene arrangements and PPE stations.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about most infection controls, but some hygiene and PPE stations lacked equipment.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 18 February 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control because of the coronavirus outbreak response.
Inspectors were assured about visiting arrangements, social distancing, safe admissions, PPE use, testing, outbreak management and the infection control policy. Staff had extra COVID-19 and infection control training, and people who tested positive were isolated in their bedrooms.
Inspectors were only somewhat assured about the layout and hygiene of the building. Some bathrooms and toilets did not have handwashing posters, and some PPE stations did not have hand sanitiser or bins. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Safer family visits
The home had installed a visitors' booth to allow families to visit with less risk. Families could also use Skype to stay in contact.
“The provider had installed a visitors' booth in the building which meant that families could have a comfortable visit with minimal risk.” from the report
PPE training and use
Staff had training in using PPE, and inspectors saw PPE available throughout the home and used according to current guidance.
“Staff had received training in applying and removing personal protective equipment (PPE). We saw PPE was accessible throughout the home and staff used it in accordance with the most up to date guidance.” from the report
COVID-19 testing
Testing was carried out for staff and people living at the home. Vaccinations had been given or scheduled.
“COVID -19 testing for all staff and people at the service was conducted.” from the report
Extra cleaning
The home carried out extra cleaning of areas that people touched often.
“Additional cleaning of high-touch areas, such as light switches and door handles, was completed.” from the report
Some hygiene stations were incomplete
needs fixingSome bathrooms and toilets lacked handwashing posters. Some stations for putting on and removing PPE lacked hand sanitiser and bins for used PPE.
“Some of the bathrooms and toilets did not have display posters promoting handwashing. Some donning and doffing stations in the building lacked hand sanitisers and bins for PPE disposal.” from the report
- 01Have the missing handwashing posters now been put up in every bathroom and toilet?
- 02Do all PPE stations now have hand sanitiser and suitable bins, and how often are they checked?
- 03How are visitors currently able to see residents, and are alternative contact methods still available?
- 04How often are staff and residents tested for COVID-19, and what happens if someone tests positive?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 March 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, August 2019
Cherry Trees Resource Centre was rated Outstanding overall; inspectors found exceptionally caring, responsive and well-led support, with safe and effective care rated Good.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 10 and 11 July 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and a visiting professional. They also observed care and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
People were described as receiving exceptional, personalised support. Staff respected people's identity, culture and communication needs. People and families were involved in care decisions, activities and reviews.
The home was clean and safe, staffing appeared sufficient, and medicines were generally managed properly. People had access to healthcare, personalised food and meaningful activities. Two medicines were slightly overstocked because of a recent pharmacy change, but this was being addressed.
The overall rating improved from Good at the previous inspection to Outstanding. Caring, responsive and well-led were rated Outstanding, while Safe and Effective remained Good.
Kind and individual care
Staff were described as exceptionally caring and respectful. They took time to understand people's personal histories, identities and relationships.
“People received exceptional care and support from a staff team who valued and celebrated individuality and diversity.” from the report
Inclusive communication
Staff used translators, technology, picture cards, gestures and people's own languages or dialects to help them express choices and take part in decisions.
“People's individual communication needs were assessed, and a range of communication methods had been used to support people to share their views and be involved in making decisions.” from the report
Meaningful activities
Activities reflected people's interests, backgrounds and cultural needs. These included gardening, community events, music, school links and themed celebrations.
“There was a focus on meaningful fun, engagement and reminiscence.” from the report
Strong leadership
Inspectors found an open culture, clear accountability and regular quality checks. Feedback from people, families, staff and professionals was very positive.
“Governance was well embedded in the management of the service and there was a strong focus on accountability, continuous improvement and exceeding expectations.” from the report
Good safety arrangements
The home monitored risks, kept the environment clean and used incidents to reduce future risks. Inspectors found that people did not have to wait for support.
“Observations were that people did not need to wait for any support and staff were able to spend with people in a relaxed and unhurried manner.” from the report
Medicine stock levels
minorTwo medicines were slightly overstocked after a change of pharmacy. The report says the issue was being addressed.
“It had been identified that two medicines were slightly overstocked due to a recent change in pharmacy. This was being addressed.” from the report
Delay in DoLS assessments
needs fixingApplications had been made, but the managing authority had not yet assessed some applications and had issued holding letters.
“DoLS applications had been made and 'holding' letters received from the managing authority due to a delay in assessing applications.” from the report
- 01How was the overstocking of two medicines resolved after the pharmacy change?
- 02Are any of the current residents still waiting for a formal DoLS assessment, and how are their rights protected while they wait?
- 03How would you support my relative if they communicate in a language other than English or cannot communicate verbally?
- 04Which activities and cultural events would be available for my relative based on their interests and background?
- 05How would my family be involved in reviewing and updating my relative's care plan?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, and the report says both the premises and the care provided were looked at. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 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 Cherry Trees Resource Centre
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Cherry Trees Resource Centre →
- August 2019Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
Read what inspectors found at Cherry Trees Resource Centre →
- December 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2014GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 February 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
90 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottingham
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 £1,270 a week. 73 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.