CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Claremont Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and safer visiting arrangements.
This was a targeted inspection on 19 January 2022. It looked at infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 response, and asked about staffing pressures. The visit was announced four hours beforehand.
Inspectors said the home had suitable measures for visitors, including risk assessments and advice from the local health protection team. Staff supported people's mental wellbeing during isolation. The home was clean and had a well-maintained cleaning schedule.
Inspectors were assured that the home used personal protective equipment safely, supported testing, followed shielding and distancing rules, and had an up-to-date infection control policy. Structural changes had created a private, pleasant and well-ventilated area for visits.
The overall service was inspected but not rated. The Safe question was also inspected but not rated. This was not a full inspection of all areas of care.
Infection control
Inspectors found a strong cleaning process, a clean environment and an up-to-date infection prevention and control policy.
“The service had a robust cleaning schedule in place with well-maintained records. The home appeared clean throughout.” from the report
Safer visiting
The home risk assessed visitors and made arrangements for essential visitors and relatives of people receiving end of life care.
“The service risk assessed visitors to the service where appropriate, to determine if other visitors could also be supported to visit the service.” from the report
Support during isolation
Staff helped people stay engaged and supported their mental wellbeing when they had to isolate.
“The registered manager and staff were aware of the importance of supporting people's mental wellbeing during periods of isolation.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What measures are currently in place to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures?
- 02What visiting arrangements apply now, including during an outbreak or for relatives of someone receiving end of life care?
- 03Can we see the private, well-ventilated visiting area described in the report?
- 04How does the home support people's mental wellbeing during isolation?
- 05How often are infection control policies, cleaning records and testing arrangements reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures; it did not rate the other four key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 March 2022 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 2018
Claremont Care Home was rated Good overall, but well-led Requires Improvement; inspectors found major progress after earlier breaches, with some work still continuing.
This was an unannounced inspection on 15 October 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and management. They also observed care and checked records about medicines, staffing, care plans, activities, complaints, accidents and safety.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective, caring and responsive care. Inspectors found safer storage of hazardous substances, a low risk from Legionella, safe medicines systems, enough staff, improved care plans and kind relationships between staff and people.
The well-led rating improved from Inadequate to Requires Improvement. Quality checks and management had improved, but CQC wanted to see a longer period of consistent good practice. There were no regulatory breaches at this inspection.
Safer environment
Hazardous cleaning materials were locked away, safety checks were in place and the Legionella risk was assessed as low.
“At this inspection we found cleaning materials and other substances hazardous to health were stored in a locked cupboard to minimise the risk of people being harmed” from the report
Safe medicines
Inspectors found medicines were stored and given safely. Staff training and competency checks were in place.
“Medicines management and administration processes were reviewed during the inspection and found to be safe.” from the report
Kind relationships
Staff knew people well and understood their preferences, backgrounds and needs. Inspectors saw respectful and reassuring care.
“We saw good interactions between staff and people, they knew each other well and had developed caring relationships.” from the report
Improved care records
Care plans had become clearer, more detailed and more focused on each person. They included a short profile to help staff understand what mattered to the person.
“Care plans were person-centred and comprehensive yet easy to navigate and information was readily accessible.” from the report
Better quality checks
The manager had introduced regular audits covering areas such as medicines, care plans, complaints, accidents and the environment.
“Since our last inspection the manager introduced a number of auditing systems to improve the quality assurance of the home.” from the report
Leadership still being monitored
needs fixingThe well-led rating remained Requires Improvement. CQC wanted a longer track record showing that the improved systems and practice were consistent.
“To improve the rating to 'Good' would require a longer-term track record of consistent good practice.” from the report
Dementia-friendly environment
needs fixingSome changes had started, including clearer signs and personalised bedroom doors. The home still needed to improve areas such as heavily patterned carpets.
“We considered that the provider had made some progress in response to the recommendation to improve the environment for people living with dementia, but there was still scope for further improvements.” from the report
Meal choice aids
minorPeople could choose meals and alternatives were available, but pictorial menus were not yet in place for people with dementia, memory loss or limited verbal communication.
“However, we found no pictorial menus for people with dementia, memory loss or poor verbal communication to facilitate their involvement in choice around their meals.” from the report
Activities still developing
minorThere were group activities and some one-to-one time, but the home was still working to make activities consistently meaningful and tailored to each person.
“Work was ongoing to ensure people were supported to participate in meaningful, person-centred activities.” from the report
- 01What evidence can you show that the improved quality checks have been maintained since this inspection?
- 02What further changes have been made to the environment for people living with dementia, including the patterned carpets?
- 03Are pictorial menus now available for people who have dementia, memory loss or difficulty communicating?
- 04How are activities planned and reviewed to make sure they are meaningful and person-centred?
- 05Has the manager completed registration with CQC, and how is leadership monitored while this is being completed?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and all five CQC questions, including care, safety, staffing, records, medicines and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 November 2018 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 Claremont Care Home
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- March 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 November 2012.
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 Trafford
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. 91 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.