CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Dercliffe Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home prevented and managed infection risks, including visitor screening, PPE, testing, cleaning, social distancing and safe admissions.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Dercliffe Care Home had a targeted inspection and inspectors were assured about infection prevention, but the service was not rated overall.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 17 February 2021. It was carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic and focused only on infection prevention and control.
Inspectors found that visitors were screened, PPE was available and used safely, and new residents were admitted after a negative COVID-19 test with a period of self-isolation. They also found that the home was clean, well ventilated and arranged to support social distancing.
The home was marked “Inspected but not rated”. This means the inspection checked infection control arrangements but did not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other four areas.
Infection control procedures
Staff understood and followed the home's infection prevention and control procedures.
“The registered manager had established effective infection prevention and control procedures which were understood and followed by the staff.” from the report
Visitor arrangements
The home screened visitors and had created a separate visiting area with external access.
“A visitors pod with external access had been built in the conservatory, which was designed to facilitate visits from friends and family members.” from the report
PPE and staffing
There were plentiful PPE supplies, staff used PPE correctly, and staffing arrangements were in place to provide continuity if there was a shortage.
“There were sufficient staff to provide continuity of support should there be a staff shortage.” from the report
Clean and suitable environment
Inspectors found the home hygienic, with enhanced cleaning, good ventilation and communal areas suitable for social distancing.
“The premises had a high level of cleanliness and was hygienic throughout.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently screened, and what PPE or other precautions are required?
- 02What happens if a new resident tests positive or needs to self-isolate after admission?
- 03How often are infection control procedures and cleaning arrangements checked now?
- 04What is the current plan if there is an infection outbreak or a staff shortage?
- 05What was the home's most recent full inspection rating for caring, effective care, responsiveness and leadership?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; it did not rate the other four questions or the service overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 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, February 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, but noted shared use of the medicines room and some care record gaps.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 15 and 16 January 2018. They observed care, spoke with people, a relative, staff and managers, toured the home, and checked care records, medicines information, recruitment files, training records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and were treated well. Inspectors found enough trained staff, suitable care planning, respectful support, activities, access to health professionals and systems to monitor quality.
The previous inspection had found problems with staff recruitment records and late notifications to CQC. Inspectors found these issues had been corrected. They recommended reviewing the shared use of the medicines room, developing a homely remedies policy and improving some risk assessment and care plan records.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff were available to meet people's needs. Staffing levels were adjusted when people's needs or circumstances changed.
“There were sufficient staff to meet people's care and support needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with warmth, respect and dignity. Staff supported people discreetly and at a pace that suited them.
“We observed staff interacted in a caring and respectful manner with people living in the home.” from the report
Individual support
Care plans included people's preferences, routines and life history. People and relatives were involved in care planning and reviews.
“This meant staff were provided with appropriate information to enable them to respond effectively to each person's individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Activities and choice
People could take part in activities in the home and on trips outside. They also had individual time with the activities organiser.
“The activities inside the home included exercise classes, bingo, reminiscence and games.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used audits, feedback and action plans to check care and follow up improvements. An area manager also carried out regular audits.
“The audits and checks were designed to ensure different aspects of the service were meeting the required standards.” from the report
Shared medicines room
needs fixingThe medicines room was also used for hairdressing and was accessed through the staff toilet. Inspectors recommended reviewing this arrangement and developing a policy for over-the-counter medicines.
“However, we noted the medicines room also incorporated hairdressing facilities and access to the staff toilet.” from the report
Care plan review records
needs fixingAlthough plans were reviewed, the records did not clearly show which sections had been checked. The manager said the recording process would be considered.
“This meant it was not clear what aspects of the plan had been reviewed.” from the report
- 01How is the medicines room now used, and are hairdressing and toilet access still part of the same arrangement?
- 02Has the homely remedies policy and procedure been completed, and how are over-the-counter medicines managed now?
- 03How do you make sure every section of each care plan is reviewed and clearly recorded?
- 04What action was taken to complete risk assessments and record strategies for behaviour that may challenge the service?
- 05How are staffing levels adjusted when residents' needs change or staff are absent?
This was an unannounced inspection of the whole care home, covering all five CQC questions and the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 February 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 Dercliffe Care Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 December 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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.