CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Lawwood
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed through screening, testing, protective equipment, cleaning and updated policies. They were also told that measures were in place to reduce the effect of COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- 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 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control, safe visiting arrangements and a calm, clean home.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 22 February 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
Inspectors found that staff understood and followed infection control procedures. The home had visitor screening, regular COVID-19 testing, enough protective equipment, enhanced cleaning and good ventilation.
Visiting was being managed in line with government guidance. Families could maintain contact, and checks were made before visitors entered.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a full quality rating for the home or ratings for all five areas of care.
Infection control
Staff understood and followed infection control procedures. Protective equipment was available, used correctly and disposed of safely.
“We observed staff were using PPE appropriately.” from the report
Testing and monitoring
The home had regular COVID-19 testing for staff and residents, allowing it to act quickly when positive results were found.
“A regular programme of testing for COVID-19 was in place for staff and people living in the home.” from the report
Clean and suitable environment
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic, with suitable communal areas, enhanced cleaning and good ventilation.
“The premises had a good level of cleanliness and was hygienic throughout.” from the report
Safe visiting
The home supported family contact while carrying out checks for symptoms, temperature and lateral flow test results. Protective equipment and hand sanitiser were available for visitors.
“The provider was facilitating safe visiting in line with government guidance and people were able to maintain contact with their family members.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are COVID-19 testing arrangements for residents and staff managed now?
- 02What checks are currently made before visitors enter the home?
- 03How do you make sure there is enough PPE and that staff use it correctly?
- 04How would you manage care if COVID-19 caused staff shortages?
- 05How often are infection prevention and control policies and audits reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures, so the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 March 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, December 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and well-organised care, but two people had difficulty obtaining pain relief.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 12 and 13 November 2018. The inspector observed care, spoke with eight people, two staff members, the manager and the provider’s representative, and checked care files, medicines records, recruitment files, training records and other documents.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and were treated kindly. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, safe medicines systems, person-centred care plans, meaningful activities and good access to health professionals.
The home had remained Good since the previous inspection in July 2016. Inspectors noted two people had difficulty obtaining pain relief the night before the inspection, and the manager agreed to update the accident and incident log with the latest events.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm and friendly interactions. Staff listened to people, respected their privacy and involved them in everyday decisions.
“We saw that staff interacted well with people in a warm and friendly manner and observed that people were comfortable in the presence of the staff who were supporting them.” from the report
Safe staffing and recruitment
Staffing levels were consistent and flexible enough to respond to people’s needs. Recruitment records showed the required checks had been completed.
“The provider employed sufficient staff to keep people safe and meet their support needs in a timely way.” from the report
Staff skills and training
New staff received an induction and shadowed experienced staff. Existing staff had regular training, supervision and appraisals.
“There were established systems in place to ensure all existing staff received regular training, which included, safeguarding, medicine awareness, health and safety, fire safety, Mental Capacity Act 2005, data protection, equality and diversity, food hygiene and infection control.” from the report
Personalised activities
People helped plan activities linked to their interests. Activities included outings, swimming, shopping, meals out and holidays.
“People were supported to follow their interests and take part in activities that were socially and culturally relevant and appropriate to them.” from the report
Difficulty obtaining pain relief
seriousTwo people said they had difficulty obtaining pain relief the night before the inspection and experienced pain as a result. The manager started an investigation, reported the concern under safeguarding procedures and arranged healthcare appointments.
“However, two people highlighted difficulties in obtaining pain relief medicines the night before the inspection. Both people told us this resulted in them experiencing pain.” from the report
Accident records needed updating
needs fixingThe overall accident and incident log did not contain details of the latest accidents and incidents. The manager agreed to update it.
“There was an overall log of accidents and incidents, which the manager agreed to update with details of the latest accidents and incidents.” from the report
- 01What was the outcome of the investigation into the difficulty obtaining pain relief, and what changes were made afterwards?
- 02How do staff make sure people receive pain relief medicines promptly, including at night?
- 03Has the accident and incident log been updated, and how are actions from incidents checked?
- 04How are medicines stocks and administration monitored using the countdown sheets?
- 05What progress has been made with the manager’s registration process?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the home remained Good in every area. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 December 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 Lawwood
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 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.