CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Little Heaton 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
- Inspectors found problems with cleanliness, infection control, the environment and some medicines records. Safeguarding systems, staffing, recruitment, risk assessments and equipment checks were otherwise in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had their needs assessed and received suitable support with training, food, weight monitoring and healthcare. Staff supported people to make choices and worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and caring, and people appeared comfortable with them. Inspectors found an issue where confidential DNACPR information was displayed outside bedrooms, but this was removed straight away.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and staff knew people well. People and relatives felt activities were limited, although inspectors saw a planned schedule that changed according to people's wishes.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The manager and provider carried out audits, but these had not identified the infection control, maintenance and medicines recording concerns. The manager responded promptly and produced an action plan.
What inspectors found, November 2023
Little Heaton Care Home: Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind and effective care, but safety checks, infection control and management oversight needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection. Inspectors visited on 13 October 2023 and reviewed records, medicines, staffing and management checks. They looked around the home, observed care and a lunchtime meal, and spoke with people, relatives and staff.
The home provided kind and effective care. Staffing levels were sufficient, staff were trained, people's health and nutrition were supported, and care plans were personalised. People were also supported to make choices and maintain family relationships.
However, some areas were not clean, parts of the building needed repair or refurbishment, and some medicines records were incomplete. Audits had not found these problems. The overall rating changed from Good at the previous inspection in 2018 to Requires Improvement.
The home sent an action plan after the inspection. Inspectors made two recommendations about infection control and making the environment more suitable for people living with dementia. The report does not say that the home was placed in special measures.
Kind staff
People were supported by staff who were described as kind and caring. Inspectors saw friendly interactions and people appeared at ease.
“People were supported by kind and caring staff.” from the report
Enough trained staff
There were enough staff to provide care promptly and attentively. Recruitment checks, training and supervision were in place.
“There were sufficient staff to provide care and support to people promptly and attentively.” from the report
Good health support
People were supported with food, weight monitoring and access to health professionals. Staff made referrals when specialist advice was needed.
“People had access to a range of health and social care professionals and appropriate referrals had been made when required.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans gave staff information about people's needs and preferences. People were supported to make everyday choices.
“Staff knew people well. Care plans were detailed and provided staff with guidance and information on how people wished to receive their care.” from the report
Infection control
needs fixingSome areas were not clean, cleaning schedules were incomplete and some food was not labelled or stored correctly. Inspectors recommended reviewing current infection control guidance.
“Some areas of the home were not clean. For example, there were food splashes on the dining room walls and skirting boards were dirty.” from the report
Building condition
needs fixingSome paintwork was poor, carpets were stained and minor repairs were needed. The home sent an action plan, and the report says some repairs had been completed after the inspection.
“The home was in need of refurbishment. Some paintwork was in a poor condition and some carpets were stained.” from the report
Management checks
needs fixingAudits and checks had not identified the problems found during the inspection. This led to the Well-led rating of Requires Improvement.
“However, these had not identified the areas of concern we found during our inspection: notably concerns around infection control, general maintenance of the environment and medicines documentation.” from the report
Dementia-friendly setting
minorThe environment needed to be more suitable for people living with dementia. Some bedroom doors lacked names and some memory boxes were empty.
“Some attempt had been made to make the environment suitable for people living with dementia.” from the report
- 01What has been done to put right the cleanliness, laundry, food storage and cleaning schedule concerns?
- 02How are medicines records now checked, especially records for medicines taken as needed and creams?
- 03Which refurbishment and environmental repairs have been completed, and what work is still planned?
- 04How are audits now identifying problems that were missed before the inspection?
- 05What activities are currently available, given that people and relatives said activities had been limited?
This was an unannounced inspection that looked at all five key questions, including infection prevention and control; the previous Good rating from 2018 changed to Requires Improvement overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 November 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.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Little Heaton Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 18 November 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found visitors had temperature checks and made declarations before entering. They saw effective use of protective equipment, handwashing signs, cleaning schedules and infection control audits. People at higher risk were shielding and risk assessments were in place.
The home used video and phone calls to help people keep in touch with family and friends during local restrictions. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not provide an overall quality rating.
Protective equipment
Staff used protective equipment effectively, and residents confirmed that staff wore it.
“Personal protective equipment (PPE) was used effectively to safeguard staff and people using the service.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors had declarations and temperature checks before entering the home.
“Visitors declarations and temperatures were undertaken prior to entry.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic and checked cleaning schedules and infection control audits.
“We observed the home looked clean and hygienic.” from the report
Family contact
The home used video and phone calls to help residents keep in contact with family and friends during restrictions.
“Alternative measures such as video calls and phone calls were utilised to update and maintain contact with family and friends.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently screened before entering the home?
- 02How do you train staff to use protective equipment and follow infection control procedures?
- 03How do you currently test residents and staff when infection is suspected or present?
- 04What arrangements are in place for managing an infection outbreak?
- 05How can residents keep in contact with family if visiting is restricted?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other four questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 December 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.
Every inspection of Little Heaton Care Home
6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Requires improvement.
- November 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2015InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 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
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.