CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Linden House Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- There were not always enough staff to meet people’s needs or monitor their safety. The home was not always clean, although medicines, recruitment checks, safeguarding training and equipment checks were generally satisfactory.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- Care did not always reflect people’s assessed needs, and two people were unhappy with the meals. Staff training and healthcare support were positive, but the environment needed review for people living with dementia.
- Caring?
- Requires improvement
- People and relatives described staff as kind, patient and helpful, and inspectors saw staff offering reassurance. However, people did not always receive support when needed, some were woken very early, and inspectors observed staff entering a room without knocking.
- Responsive?
- Requires improvement
- People’s care records contained their needs, risks and preferences, and activities and visits were supported. However, delays in support and weak safety monitoring meant people’s needs were not always met.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The home had systems for audits, complaints, meetings and partnership working, but checks did not consistently identify or fix problems promptly. Some action plans did not say clearly what would be improved or by when.
What inspectors found, January 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind staff and safe medicines, but staffing, cleanliness, dignity and management needed urgent improvement.
Inspectors visited on 9 and 10 November 2022. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals, and reviewed care plans, medicines records, recruitment files and management audits. The first day was unannounced.
The home did not always have enough staff to support people when needed or monitor their safety. Inspectors also found unpleasant smells and gaps in cleaning checks. Some people were woken very early because there were not enough staff to support them later.
Staff were generally described as kind and competent. Medicines were managed safely, people received healthcare support and activities were available. However, inspectors found that people were not always treated with dignity, and the home’s checks did not lead to improvements quickly enough.
All five areas were rated Requires Improvement. This means care was inconsistent and there was limited assurance about safety. This was the first inspection of the newly registered home.
Medicines
Medicines were managed safely and in line with national guidance. Staff who administered medicines were trained and assessed as competent.
“People's medicines were managed safely, in line with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance.” from the report
Kind staff
People and relatives generally found staff kind, patient and helpful. Inspectors saw staff reassuring people who were confused or distressed.
“We saw staff supporting people in a caring way. People looked relaxed around staff.” from the report
Staff training
Staff completed induction, mandatory training, supervision and appraisals. People and relatives were generally satisfied with staff’s knowledge and skills.
“Staff completed an induction and the provider's mandatory training when they joined the service and their training was updated regularly.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to maintain important relationships and take part in group and one-to-one activities. Most people and relatives were happy with the activities.
“During the inspection, we observed people taking part in arts and crafts and enjoying a singer who visited the home.” from the report
Healthcare support
Nursing staff were available at all times, and healthcare professionals gave mainly positive feedback about referrals and following treatment advice.
“People received appropriate support with their healthcare needs and nursing staff were on duty at all times.” from the report
Not enough staff
seriousThere were delays in people receiving support, and staff said there were not enough people to monitor communal areas safely. Inspectors found this placed people at risk of harm.
“The provider had failed to ensure there were always sufficient staff to meet the needs of people living at the home.” from the report
Cleanliness
seriousSome parts of the home, including bedrooms, had unpleasant odours. Infection control audits were not always completed often enough and problems were not always fixed promptly.
“The provider had failed to ensure that that appropriate standards of cleanliness were being maintained at the home.” from the report
Dignity and privacy
seriousPeople were sometimes woken very early and did not always receive support when needed. Inspectors also saw staff enter a person’s room without knocking.
“The provider had failed to ensure people were treated with dignity and respect.” from the report
Weak oversight
seriousManagement audits and checks did not always maintain safe and good-quality care. Identified problems were not always dealt with promptly, and some action plans lacked clear deadlines.
“The provider had failed to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
Meals
needs fixingTwo people were unhappy with the meals, including how they were cooked or presented.
“I don't like the food because I don't think it's cooked or presented well.” from the report
- 01How many staff are now on duty during the day and at night, and how are communal areas monitored?
- 02What has been done to prevent people being woken very early because of staffing levels?
- 03How often are cleanliness and infection control checks now completed, and how quickly are problems put right?
- 04What action has been taken to ensure staff always protect people’s dignity and knock before entering rooms?
- 05What improvements have been made to the communal environment for people living with dementia?
This was the first inspection of the newly registered home and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 January 2023 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 Linden House Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- January 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 September 2022.
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 Rochdale
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. 11 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
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.