CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Iddenshall Hall
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including PPE, testing, social distancing, visiting, admissions and outbreak management. They also found the premises clean and hygienic.
- 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?
- Outstanding
- 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, February 2021
Iddenshall Hall was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control, with some further development suggested.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 January 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, social distancing, admissions, PPE, testing and possible outbreaks. They also found the environment clean and hygienic, with extra cleaning in place.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a separate rated judgement for safety. Inspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach.
Clean environment
The home was clean and hygienic, with increased cleaning to reduce the risk of infection spreading.
“The environment was very clean and hygienic and increased cleaning schedules to reduce the risks of cross infection were in place.” from the report
PPE and testing
Staff were seen wearing the correct PPE and inspectors were assured that PPE was used safely. People living in the home and staff were taking part in regular COVID-19 testing.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Communication with relatives
Relatives said they received regular updates about COVID-19 cases, visiting arrangements and vaccinations.
“They are very open and transparent, and we always know whether visiting is allowed or not.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its infection prevention and control approach. The report does not explain which parts needed development.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What infection prevention and control resources did inspectors ask the home to use, and what changes were made afterwards?
- 02How are people living in the home and staff tested for COVID-19 now?
- 03How does the home currently manage visits and protect people from infection?
- 04What arrangements are in place if someone develops symptoms or there is an outbreak?
- 05How often are communal areas and other parts of the home cleaned?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only, so it did not rate the home's wider care or overall quality. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 February 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, November 2018
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding responsiveness and highly personalised activities and care planning.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 24 September and 3 October 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, managers and care staff. They also checked care records, staff recruitment records and other management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. Inspectors found that people's risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely, staff were trained and people were treated with dignity and respect.
The home was rated Outstanding for Responsive. Inspectors found very detailed personal care plans and a wide range of activities based on people's interests, abilities and backgrounds. The overall Good rating stayed the same as at the previous inspection, while Responsive improved from Good to Outstanding.
Personalised care planning
Care plans included detailed information about people's histories, cultural backgrounds, wishes and changing needs. People and families were involved in reviews where appropriate.
“Care plans provided highly detailed and personalised information with clear guidelines for staff to support people in important aspects of their lives.” from the report
Meaningful activities
The home offered group and one-to-one activities linked to people's interests and goals. Inspectors saw examples of activities helping people build confidence, mobility and social connections.
“The activities available to people were extensive.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people well and understood their likes, dislikes and communication needs. Inspectors observed privacy and dignity being maintained during care.
“Many of the staff had worked at the service for a number of years; it was clear when speaking with staff and observing their actions that they knew people well and had good positive relationships with them.” from the report
Safe medicines management
Medicines were stored securely and administered by trained staff. Records, storage temperatures and medicine expiry dates were checked.
“There were safe systems for the administration, ordering, storage and disposal of medicines.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff described managers as visible, supportive and approachable. The home carried out regular checks and acted to maintain quality and safety.
“The quality and safety of the service was regularly checked.” from the report
Falls work was still being evaluated
minorThe home had introduced movement classes and worked with a falls team, but it was still collecting information to find out whether falls had reduced.
“The service was in the process of collating information to determine whether falls had been reduced as a result of this initiative.” from the report
- 01How will you measure whether the Morning Movement falls prevention work has reduced falls?
- 02How would you match activities to my relative's interests, abilities, communication needs and preferred level of social contact?
- 03How often would my relative's care plan be reviewed, and how would our family be involved?
- 04What training and supervision would the staff supporting my relative receive?
- 05How would I raise a concern or complaint, and who would keep me informed about the outcome?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the overall service, including care, accommodation, records, staffing, medicines and management. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 November 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 Iddenshall Hall
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 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.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 February 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
84 live-in carers within about an hour of Cheshire West and Chester
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. 76 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the home.”
“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.