CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Conifers
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including PPE, visiting, admissions, hygiene, outbreaks and the home's policy. They were also told that measures were in place to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, January 2022
Conifers was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control and visiting arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 January 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, admissions and staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
Inspectors were assured that visitors were protected from infection, staff used personal protective equipment correctly, and the home followed guidance on visits, social distancing and shielding. People could see visitors or use video calls when visits were not possible.
The overall service and Safe question were marked "Inspected but not rated". This was not a full inspection, so it does not provide a new rating for the quality of care across all five areas.
Visitor infection controls
The home used clear information and instructions to help prevent visitors bringing in or spreading COVID-19.
“The provider was following best practice guidance in terms of ensuring visitors to the home did not introduce and spread COVID19.” from the report
Correct PPE use
Inspectors saw staff wearing the required protective equipment correctly while supporting people.
“We observed staff wearing the required PPE correctly whilst supporting people at the home.” from the report
Maintaining family contact
People were supported to have visits where possible, or to keep in touch with family by video call.
“People were supported to see their visitors following the latest guidance, where visits were not possible people were supported to speak to their families via video call.” from the report
Safe admissions
The home had clear admission policies intended to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission.
“The provider had clear policies on admissions of people to the home.” from the report
Testing approach
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to help develop its approach to testing people using the service and staff.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01How do you currently test people living here and staff?
- 02How are visits arranged now, and what happens if an in-person visit is not possible?
- 03How do you manage admissions to reduce the risk of infection?
- 04How do you manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures, and could these affect people's care?
- 05How do you make sure staff and visiting professionals follow PPE and infection control requirements?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 January 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, September 2019
Conifers was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but end-of-life planning needed improvement.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 15 August 2019. One inspector spoke with people, relatives, managers and staff, observed care, checked records and inspected the building. Further checks were made after the visit.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were protected from abuse, received their medicines safely and had enough staff support. The home was clean and staff understood people's risks and needs.
Inspectors found that staff were kind, respectful and trained. Care plans were personalised and people were supported with communication, activities, family relationships and healthcare. However, people staying for longer periods had not been supported to plan or discuss their end-of-life wishes.
The overall Good rating means the inspectors judged that people experienced good care and that the service was consistently managed. The previous inspection was also rated Good, published on 10 March 2017.
Good safety arrangements
Staff understood safeguarding, individual risks and medical emergencies. Medicines were managed safely and restraint was used only as a last resort and reviewed.
“People were protected from the risk of abuse and unsafe care.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw caring interactions and found that staff respected privacy, dignity, individuality and independence.
“We saw lots of caring and positive interactions between people and staff.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included people's needs, preferences and routines. Staff followed these plans and checked for changes when people returned for respite.
“People's care records were written and designed in a person-centred manner.” from the report
Good communication support
The home used communication aids, easy-read information and assistive technology to help people express themselves and understand information.
“We saw arrangements had been made to provide people with alternative communication aids.” from the report
Positive management
Staff and relatives described approachable managers and a friendly atmosphere. Quality systems were used to monitor care and identify improvements.
“There was a positive culture throughout the service which focused on providing care that was individualised.” from the report
End-of-life wishes not recorded
needs fixingPeople staying for longer periods had not been supported to discuss or plan their end-of-life care preferences. The manager said arrangements would be made immediately to address this.
“People who were staying at the service on long term respite had not been supported to plan for their end of life care or to discuss their end of life care preferences.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to ensure each person can discuss and record their end-of-life care preferences?
- 02How would you support my relative's particular communication needs, including any communication aids or assistive technology?
- 03How would staff manage my relative's specific risks, such as choking, seizures or travelling in the community?
- 04How do you check that staff remain competent to administer medicines, including medicines given through a PEG tube?
- 05How would you help my relative maintain family relationships, day care and activities during a respite stay?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home's premises; some people could not be spoken with because of their complex needs. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 September 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 Conifers
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 February 2015.
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
62 live-in carers within about an hour of Derbyshire
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 £1,010 to £1,260 a week. 51 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.