CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Greengate House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including cleaning, protective equipment, testing, visiting and outbreak management. The provider said it had measures to reduce the risks from COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and support for family contact during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 9 February 2022. The inspectors checked infection prevention and control, and asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
The home was clean and hygienic. Inspectors were assured that staff used protective equipment safely, people and staff could access testing, and visitors were protected from infection. The home also had plans for managing outbreaks and periods of isolation.
People were supported to keep in touch with family and to access the community safely. Staff kept families informed about important changes, especially those linked to COVID-19.
The service was inspected but not rated. This was not a full inspection of all areas of care, so the report does not give an overall rating.
Family contact
People were supported to keep in touch with relatives through visits and other communication. Staff also kept families informed about important changes.
“People were supported to maintain contact with family members through regular visits and other forms of communication.” from the report
Clean home
The home was visibly clean and hygienic, with cleaning schedules in place and checks on staff practice.
“The home was visibly clean and hygienic and regular cleaning schedules were maintained to evidence regular cleaning tasks were being completed.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that staff used protective equipment safely and that testing, vaccination checks and outbreak arrangements were in place.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Safe community access
The home had measures to help people use the community while managing COVID-19 risks.
“Measures were in place to support people who wished to access to the community to ensure COVID-19 related risks were managed safely.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What arrangements are currently in place to manage staffing pressures during illness or outbreaks?
- 02How are visits from family members arranged now, and what infection control measures apply?
- 03How does the home currently support people to access the community safely?
- 04What happens if a resident tests positive, and how are their health and wellbeing monitored during isolation?
- 05How does the home check that staff and visiting professionals meet current vaccination or exemption requirements?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with questions about COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not provide ratings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 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, April 2019
Greengate House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection on 27 February 2019. One inspector spoke with five people, a relative, the manager and three staff. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files, training records, meetings and incident records.
Inspectors found people were safe and received effective care. Staff were trained, numbers were suitable, risks were assessed, medicines records were complete, and safeguarding arrangements were understood. People described staff as kind, respectful and supportive.
Care was tailored to people's needs and choices. People could choose activities, meals, routines and room arrangements, and were supported to keep links with relatives and the community. Management had systems for checking quality and learning from concerns.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published in September 2016.
Safe medicines
Medicines were managed by trained staff whose competence was checked. Records were complete and audits were used to identify and address improvements.
“Medication administration records (MARs) were in place and had been fully completed.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People said staff were friendly, kind and caring. Inspectors found that staff understood people's needs, wishes and preferences.
“People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion by staff.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans contained detailed guidance about people's needs, preferences and routines. People were involved in decisions about their care.
“Care plans were detailed and held sufficient information and guidance for staff to be able to meet people's preferred needs.” from the report
Choice and activities
People could choose from activities in the home and community. They were also supported to go on holiday and maintain contact with relatives.
“People had access to a range of activities within the service and in the local community.” from the report
Quality oversight
The management team used audits, meetings and reviews to monitor the service. Actions were taken when issues or areas for improvement were identified.
“Regular audits were undertaken across all areas of the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and review my relative's mental health needs and personal choices before they move in?
- 02How do you make sure medicines are administered safely and that any errors or discrepancies are investigated?
- 03What activities and community opportunities would be suitable for my relative's interests and abilities?
- 04How would my relative be supported to keep in contact with family and attend healthcare appointments?
- 05How can my relative raise a concern or complaint, and how will the home respond?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, based on the previous Good rating; the inspector spoke with five people, a relative and staff and reviewed care and service records. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 April 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 Greengate House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 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 St. Helens
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. 92 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
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.