CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Laburnum Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were managed, including visitors, admissions, protective equipment, testing, distancing, hygiene and outbreaks.
- 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, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed well.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 03 November 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors checked how visitors, admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, distancing, hygiene and outbreaks were managed. They said they were assured in all these areas.
The home was being used as a designated setting for people discharged from hospital with a positive Covid-19 status. The inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a separate rated judgement for safety.
Visitor controls
The reception process clearly explained current requirements to professional visitors and helped reduce the risk of infection spreading.
“There was an excellent procedure in place at the reception area, which was clearly communicated to professional visitors.” from the report
Family communication
The home kept in regular contact with relatives and shared current guidance with them.
“The service had developed good relationships with people's family members and kept in regular contact with them” from the report
Outbreak management
The home followed guidance, contained outbreaks and used what it learned to prepare for further problems.
“The service had followed guidance well and managed to contain outbreaks and learn lessons to inform any further issues.” from the report
Working with clinicians
Inspectors found that staff and clinicians worked well together and respected each other's skills.
“Joint working with clinicians had worked well and a mutual respect and acknowledgement of strengths and skills was evident.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently screened and told about infection control requirements?
- 02How are new admissions tested and safely separated when needed?
- 03How is personal protective equipment used and checked by staff?
- 04How do you keep relatives informed when guidance or visiting arrangements change?
- 05What lessons from previous outbreaks have been put into practice?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; it was inspected but not rated and did not assess the other areas of care in detail. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 November 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.
What inspectors found, April 2018
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, well-organised rehabilitation care, but identified medicines shortfalls that were dealt with or being addressed.
Inspectors visited unannounced on 14 February 2018. They spoke with five people using the service, two relatives and staff. They reviewed care records, training records, medicines, recruitment information and how the home was managed.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home provides short-stay intermediate care for up to 32 people, with nursing, therapy and social care support aimed at helping people return home or move to another care setting.
Inspectors found enough staff on the day, suitable training, person-centred care plans, good teamwork and respectful care. They found some medicines problems, including an out-of-date medicine and weak recording of medicine times. The manager took immediate action on several issues, and further guidance and recording systems were put in place or promised.
Good staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff on the day and saw that staffing was adjusted to people's dependency levels. Recruitment checks and staff training were also described as robust.
“There were sufficient staff on duty on the day of the inspection.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Inspectors saw friendly, patient and respectful interactions.
“We observed positive interactions between staff and people staying at the service.” from the report
Strong rehabilitation and discharge planning
The home involved several professional teams and used care plans, therapy and discharge checks to support people returning home safely.
“The registered manager and all the teams based at the service worked together to make sure people received care and support in a coherent way.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used audits, performance information, staff meetings and feedback from people and relatives to monitor the service and identify actions.
“A range of audits were in place to monitor the health safety and welfare of people who used the service.” from the report
Medicines were not always handled safely
needs fixingInspectors found an out-of-date medicine, loose tablets and an unlabelled bottle in the medicines trolley. The manager acted immediately to address these issues.
“We found that the homely remedies medicines, medicines that can be purchased over the counter for simple ailments such as pain or constipation, were not handled safely” from the report
Medicine timing and guidance
needs fixingSome medicines that needed to be given before food were not always given at the right time. There was also no guidance for variable-dose, as-required medicines and creams, although the manager said action had been taken or would be taken.
“We saw that medicines which should be given before food were not always given at the correct time.” from the report
Medicine storage records
minorWaste medicines were not stored properly because a cupboard lock had broken. Fridge temperatures were recorded, but the daily maximum and minimum temperatures were not recorded.
“However we noted that waste medication was not stored properly.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to prevent out-of-date, loose or unlabelled medicines being kept in the medicines trolley?
- 02How do you now record the times for medicines that must be given at specific times or before food?
- 03What guidance do staff use for variable-dose and as-required medicines, and for applying creams?
- 04How is waste medicine kept secure, and has the broken storage cupboard lock been replaced?
- 05How will you involve our relative and family in rehabilitation goals and planning a safe discharge home?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, including all five CQC questions, the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 April 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 Laburnum Lodge
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 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 18 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 Bolton
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.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“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.”
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.