CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Claremont Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, risk assessments and building checks. Premises maintenance had improved, and medicines and infection control were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The home had systems for monitoring quality and gathering feedback, but it had no registered manager in post. An acting manager and area manager were overseeing the home while recruitment plans were in place.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe care and improvements, but well-led was Requires Improvement because there was no registered manager.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 13 April 2023. Inspectors spoke with people using the home, relatives and staff, and checked care records, training records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments and safer premises than at the previous inspection. Medicines, infection control and safeguarding arrangements were also found to be satisfactory.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Well-led. The main reason was that there had been no registered manager since May 2022. An acting manager and area manager were running the home, and recruitment plans were in place.
The overall rating changed from Requires Improvement to Good. However, the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were not examined during this inspection and were carried forward from the previous inspection.
Safer premises
The home had addressed earlier concerns about damaged areas and out-of-date safety certificates. Building and equipment checks were available.
“We looked around the home during the inspection and found the provider had taken appropriate action to address these concerns.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff recruitment checks, including references and DBS checks, were completed.
“There were enough staff employed to care for people safely.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored securely, records were completed accurately and temperature checks were carried out for medicines kept in a fridge.
“MAR were completed accurately by staff when medicines were administered.” from the report
Safeguarding and risk management
Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse. People's risk assessments covered areas such as falls, nutrition and skin integrity, with control measures in place.
“Staff understood about safeguarding and said they had received training.” from the report
Feedback and monitoring
The home used surveys, meetings and out-of-hours checks to gather views and monitor standards.
“Systems were in place to involve people, relatives and staff in how the service was run, including the use of satisfaction surveys to obtain feedback.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThe home had not had a registered manager since May 2022. This limited the Well-led rating to Requires Improvement, although an acting manager and area manager were in place.
“At the time of the inspection, the home did not have a registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01What progress has been made in recruiting and registering a permanent manager since the inspection?
- 02Who is responsible for the home while there is no registered manager, and how often does the area manager visit?
- 03How are building safety checks and repairs monitored now that earlier premises concerns have been addressed?
- 04How will you keep families informed about quality checks, satisfaction surveys and any incidents?
- 05What were the current ratings and findings for Effective, Caring and Responsive at the previous inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 May 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, October 2021
Claremont Lodge rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found unsafe building conditions and weak checks, although medicines, staffing and day-to-day care were described positively.
Inspectors visited on 23 and 28 September 2021 after concerns about the condition of the building. They looked mainly at safety and how the home was managed. They spoke with people, staff and the manager, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The building was not properly maintained. Inspectors found damaged windows, flooring, ceilings, sinks, furniture, doors and handrails. Gas and electrical safety checks had expired, and further fire safety work was needed. These issues led to a breach of Regulation 15.
People said they felt safe. Medicines were recorded and given safely, there were enough staff, and staff used suitable protective equipment. However, provider checks had not been completed since 2020 and did not properly monitor the building. This led to a breach of Regulation 17 and a warning notice.
The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection to Requires Improvement. Only Safe and Well-led were inspected this time. The ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the earlier comprehensive inspection.
Medicines
Inspectors found medicines securely stored, accurately recorded and administered safely. Records checked had no missing staff signatures.
“We found medicines were stored, recorded and administered safely.” from the report
Staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and appropriate recruitment checks, including references and DBS checks.
“There were enough staff to care for people safely and correct recruitment procedures were followed.” from the report
Infection control
Staff were seen using suitable protective equipment, and the home had testing and visitor procedures in place.
“We observed staff wearing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) throughout the day.” from the report
Positive staff culture
Staff described feeling supported, and people gave positive comments about the care and the new manager.
“The manager is very approachable and I feel supported in my job.” from the report
Poor building condition
seriousSeveral parts of the building and some bedroom furniture needed repair. Inspectors also found expired gas and electrical safety checks and outstanding fire safety work.
“Several areas of the home were unsafe and needed repairing.” from the report
Weak provider checks
seriousProvider audits had not been completed since 2020. They did not focus enough on building maintenance or whether safety certificates were still current.
“The last provider audits had been completed in April and August 2020 , although none had been undertaken since then.” from the report
Maintenance delays
needs fixingStaff and meeting records referred to long delays in completing maintenance work and the building looking tired.
“topics of discussion at a recent meeting had included long delays regarding maintenance work being completed and the home appearing 'tired'.” from the report
- 01Have all damaged windows, flooring, ceilings, sinks, doors, handrails and bedroom furniture now been repaired?
- 02Have the annual gas safety check and five-year electrical installation check been completed, and can you show us the certificates?
- 03What work was completed following the fire risk assessment, including work to fire doors and loft compartmentation?
- 04What action was taken in response to the warning notice about governance and provider audits?
- 05Has the manager's application to register with CQC been completed?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led after concerns about the premises; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 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 Claremont Lodge
6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2021Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: InadequateWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 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.
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 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”
“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.