Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a nursing home

What the CQC found at Cherrytrees Care Home

Goodpublished 7 March 2023, 3 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
People felt safe, medicines were managed safely and staff had suitable safeguarding training. Inspectors also found effective cleaning, infection control and safety monitoring.
Effective?
Good
This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
Caring?
Good
This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
Responsive?
Good
This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
Well-led?
Good
The home had audits, action plans and regular meetings to monitor and improve the service. Inspectors found that issues identified through monitoring had been addressed promptly.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, March 2023

Rated Good; inspectors found safe, well-managed care and improvements since the previous inspection.

This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited the home on 8 and 9 February 2023. They spoke with people living there, a relative and staff, and checked care records, medicines, safety records and management information.

The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found that people felt safe, medicines were managed properly, staffing levels met people's needs and infection control arrangements had improved. The home was clean and safeguarding concerns were reported and reviewed appropriately.

The home had previously been rated Requires Improvement. The provider had completed an action plan after the earlier inspection, and inspectors found enough improvement in infection control and management systems to remove the previous breach. The overall rating changed to Good, although the other three quality areas were not inspected during this visit and their previous ratings were carried forward.

What inspectors praised
  • Improved infection control

    Inspectors found the home was clean and that infection control procedures were in place. The previous breach in this area had been resolved.

    “The home was clean with effective cleaning and infection control processes in place.” from the report
  • Safe medicines

    Trained staff administered medicines safely and records were completed accurately. Guidance was also available for medicines given when needed.

    “Medicines were stored safely and had been given as prescribed, with records of administration completed correctly and accurately.” from the report
  • Staffing and recruitment

    Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. The home used trained bank staff to cover shortages and carried out recruitment checks.

    “Enough staff were deployed to meet needs and keep people safe.” from the report
  • Good oversight

    The home used audits and action plans to identify and address problems. Inspectors found the manager had a clear view of how the home was operating.

    “It was clear the registered manager had good oversight of the home.” from the report
  • People's views included

    People, relatives and staff were asked for their views through meetings and surveys. The home shared the results and recorded actions taken.

    “Meeting minutes were circulated to everyone, regardless of whether they attended, to ensure each person was aware what had been discussed and any agreed actions.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What were the previous ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive, and what has changed in those areas since the last comprehensive inspection?
  2. 02How do you check that the improvements in infection prevention and control have continued?
  3. 03How do you make sure bank staff understand each person's needs and care arrangements?
  4. 04How are medicines given when needed, and how do you check that they have worked?
  5. 05What recent issues have been identified through audits, and what actions were taken?

This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection control; the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 March 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.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, April 2021

Cherrytrees Care Home was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found infection control and safeguarding shortfalls, although people generally felt safe and well cared for.

This was a focused inspection carried out during March 2021. Inspectors visited the home, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.

The home needed to improve infection control. Staff were not always using protective equipment safely, required testing was not always taking place, and cleaning checks were not always recorded. Inspectors also found that some potentially abusive behaviour had not been recorded or reported properly.

There were enough staff, recruitment checks were completed, medicines were managed safely, and people and relatives spoke positively about the care and leadership. A new manager had been appointed but was not yet registered with CQC at the time of the inspection.

The overall rating changed from Good at the previous inspection in December 2018 to Requires Improvement. The home breached Regulation 12, relating to safe care and treatment, and CQC said it would check that improvements were made.

What inspectors praised
  • Enough staff

    Inspectors found there were enough staff to care for people safely. Recruitment checks, including references and DBS checks, had been completed.

    “There were enough staff to care for people safely and the feedback from staff, relatives and people living at the home were that current staffing levels were sufficient.” from the report
  • Medicines

    Medicines were ordered, stored, recorded and given safely. The four medication records checked were complete.

    “During the inspection we looked at four MARs which were all completed accurately with no missing signatures by staff.” from the report
  • People felt safe

    People living at the home and relatives told inspectors that the home was safe.

    “Both people living at the home and relatives told us they felt the service was safe.” from the report
  • Positive leadership feedback

    People, relatives and staff gave positive feedback about the new manager, teamwork and the culture in the home.

    “We received positive feedback from everybody we spoke with about management and leadership at the home.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Infection control

    serious

    Inspectors were not assured that protective equipment, testing and cleaning records were being managed safely. These failings led to a breach of Regulation 12.

    “We were not assured the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
  • Safeguarding records

    serious

    Some inappropriate behaviour was not recorded as required, and concerns were not reported to the local safeguarding team. The provider was asked to improve its safeguarding systems.

    “Staff were present when some of these behaviours took place, however nothing had ever been reported to the local safeguarding team for further investigation.” from the report
  • Quality checks

    needs fixing

    Infection control audits were not always completed on time. Some meetings for feedback had also happened less often than expected, although COVID-19 affected this.

    “Although the provider's infection prevention and control policy was up to date, IPC audits were not always being carried out within the required timescales.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How are you now making sure staff use protective equipment safely and complete the required twice-weekly testing?
  2. 02How do you record cleaning of high-touch areas, slings and hoists, and can I see recent records?
  3. 03How are staff trained to recognise, record and report safeguarding concerns and inappropriate behaviour?
  4. 04Has the new manager completed registration with CQC?
  5. 05What action has been taken in response to the Regulation 12 breach, and what checks show that it has been resolved?

This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, mainly covering infection control and management; the ratings for Caring, Effective and Responsive were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 April 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Cherrytrees Care Home

4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. March 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvement
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Cherrytrees Care Home →

  2. April 2021Requires improvementdown from Good
    Safe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read what inspectors found at Cherrytrees Care Home →

  3. December 2018Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. February 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. August 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. March 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. October 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  8. March 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  9. April 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  10. October 2011

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  11. August 2011

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  12. March 2011

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  13. November 2010

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 November 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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Salford

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. 90 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.

“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
Marion L., about Primrose N.
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the home.”
Katrina R., about Camille F.
See live-in carers near SalfordProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.