CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Forest Manor Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control, visiting arrangements and support for people to keep in touch.
This was a targeted inspection on 25 January 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether staffing pressures linked to COVID-19 were affecting care. The visit was announced 24 hours in advance.
Inspectors found that staff and visitors followed current COVID-19 guidance. There were checks on arrival, testing and checks of vaccination status. The home also used personal protective equipment, social distancing, safe admissions and suitable cleaning and hygiene arrangements.
People were supported to stay connected with relatives and friends through visits, video calls, phone calls and letters. Staff and the environment had been organised to reduce the risk of infection during an outbreak.
The service was inspected but not rated. This was not a full inspection of all five areas of care, so the report does not give an overall Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating.
Infection control
Staff and visitors followed COVID-19 guidance, with checks on arrival, testing and vaccination checks. Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infections from spreading.
“Forest Manor Care Home ensured current government guidelines in relation to COVID-19 were being followed by staff and visitors to reduce the risk of infection to people living at the home.” from the report
Keeping people connected
People could keep in touch with relatives and friends through visits and several remote communication methods.
“Forest Manor Care Home supported people who lived there to remain connected with friends and relatives through visits, video calls, phone calls and letters.” from the report
Outbreak planning
Staffing and the care home environment had been organised to reduce the risk of further infection during an outbreak.
“Forest Manor Care Home had organised their staff and the care home environment effectively to reduce the risk of further infection during an outbreak.” from the report
COVID-19 vaccination checks
The service was meeting the requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
“The service was meeting the requirement to ensure non-exempt staff and visiting professionals were vaccinated against COVID-19.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you managing any current staffing pressures, and what effect do they have on people's care?
- 02How do visits currently work, including any testing, vaccination checks or other requirements?
- 03What arrangements are in place if there is an infection outbreak?
- 04How do you support residents who cannot receive visitors to stay in touch with relatives?
- 05How do you check that staff and visiting professionals meet current COVID-19 requirements?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not provide a full rating of all five areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 February 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, March 2020
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding caring; inspectors found safe, personalised care and a few records needing improvement.
This was a planned inspection on 4 February 2020. Two inspectors visited the home, spoke with people, relatives, staff and professionals, observed care and checked care, medicines, staffing, training, safety and management records.
The home was caring, safe, effective, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found staff knew people well, supported their individual interests and worked with health professionals. People and relatives gave very positive feedback.
The caring rating improved from Good to Outstanding. The other four ratings remained Good, which the report says means the service was consistently managed and people's outcomes were consistently good.
Inspectors found a few gaps in records, including risk documentation, an as-required medicines protocol and some best-interest decision records. Staff took immediate action during the inspection to improve these records.
Exceptional personalised care
Staff understood what mattered to people and created individual experiences that supported their wellbeing, interests and sense of identity.
“People received exceptional care that consistently showed how staff went above and beyond in providing people with excellent individualised care.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors found that staff treated people with dignity, listened to them and supported them to be involved in their care.
“Respect for privacy and dignity was at the heart of the service.” from the report
Safe staffing and care
Staffing was adjusted to people's needs, recruitment checks were completed and staff understood how to reduce known risks.
“There were enough staff on duty to meet people's individual needs and safety.” from the report
Good support for individual needs
Care plans and activities reflected people's communication needs, interests, relationships, religious needs and end-of-life wishes.
“People had individual activity plans that reflected their personal preferences and choices.” from the report
Positive leadership
Inspectors found a stable staff team, effective checks on quality and safety, and good links with health professionals and the local community.
“The systems and processes that monitored quality and safety were effective and plans were in place to continually drive forward improvements.” from the report
One risk record was missing
needs fixingOne person did not have a risk assessment or care plan for a particular health condition. A nurse completed the documents immediately.
“We noted a person did not have a risk assessment or care plan about how to provide care for a particular health condition.” from the report
As-required medicines guidance
needs fixingOne person's instructions for as-required medicines needed more information. A nurse acted immediately to address this.
“We did note one person's protocol for 'as required' medicines required additional information.” from the report
Best-interest records
needs fixingSome records did not show all the required information about how and why decisions had been made for people who lacked capacity. Improvements were discussed and action was taken.
“We did note that best interest decision documentation, did not always record all the required information to show how and why the decision had been made.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure every person's risks and health conditions have a current care plan?
- 02What information is included in people's instructions for as-required medicines, and how is this checked?
- 03How do you record best-interest decisions and show the reasons behind them?
- 04How will you maintain the Outstanding standard of caring as people's needs change?
- 05How are relatives involved in reviewing care plans and end-of-life wishes?
This was a planned inspection of all five CQC questions and covered both the care provided and the care home's premises; the previous overall rating was Good, published on 18 January 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 March 2020 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 Forest Manor Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 January 2011.
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
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
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. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
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.