CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Madeline McKenna Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home managed infection prevention and control safely. They found appropriate arrangements for PPE, testing, social distancing, visiting, admissions and outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection prevention and control arrangements, with some further development signposted.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 8 February 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.
Inspectors found that visitors were protected from infection and that the home followed shielding and social distancing rules. They were also assured that people were admitted safely, PPE was used properly, and testing was available for residents and staff.
The home was clean and hygienic. Staff had cleaning schedules, supported people to self-isolate when needed, and sought advice from infection prevention and control professionals.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a rated score for Safe.
Safe use of PPE
Staff used and disposed of PPE safely and followed national guidance.
“Staff were wearing and disposing of used personal protective equipment (PPE) safely and in line with the relevant national guidance.” from the report
Testing and isolation
The home had frequent testing for staff and residents and supported people to isolate when needed.
“The home had a robust testing programme in place to frequently test staff and people living at the home.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic, with regular cleaning schedules and clear staff responsibilities.
“The home was clean and hygienic. There were cleaning schedules in place ensuring frequent cleaning took place throughout the day and staff were clear on their responsibilities regarding cleaning.” from the report
Social distancing
Furniture was arranged carefully in communal areas to promote social distancing.
“Social distancing was promoted by the careful placement of furniture in communal areas.” from the report
Further development
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach. The report does not explain what specific area needed development.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01How are staff and residents tested now, and how are the results recorded?
- 02What arrangements are currently in place for visitors to prevent infection spreading?
- 03How do you support residents and staff to self-isolate when necessary?
- 04How often are communal areas and other parts of the home cleaned?
- 05What approach did inspectors suggest developing, and what action has been taken since?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; it did not assess the other four CQC questions or give an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 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, February 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with activities the main area needing improvement.
This was the home’s first inspection. Inspectors visited without warning on 11 and 12 February 2019. They spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and the manager. They also checked care records, medicines, staff files, training, the building and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe and that staff were kind, respectful and responsive. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines systems, detailed care plans and good links with health professionals.
People said there was not much to do. The manager knew this needed attention and had asked for an activity organiser and applied for funding for an interactive table. Inspectors also noted that a gas safety certificate was not in date when first checked, although the safety check was completed during the inspection.
Safe staffing
People said staff responded quickly when they needed help. Inspectors saw staff responding promptly and spending time with people.
“If I ring for anything they get there almost immediately” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm, friendly interactions. People were listened to and supported with dignity, privacy and respect.
“They are very kind and patient with me and ask me what I want, I cannot fault them.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people’s likes, dislikes, histories and support needs. People were involved in planning their care and daily choices.
“I was fully involved in my care plan, which is kept in the office. They know exactly what I like and need” from the report
Good cleanliness
The home was clean in all areas inspectors saw. Infection prevention arrangements were in place and an external audit gave a high score.
“The assessor commended the home on being "meticulously clean.” from the report
Effective management
The manager used audits, feedback and incident information to monitor care and make improvements.
“Comprehensive audits were undertaken by the registered manager” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingPeople told inspectors there was little variety and that they could spend long periods watching television or sitting around. The manager recognised this and was seeking extra resources.
“There's not much to do. We've had some exercises this afternoon which was okay, but we won't do anything for weeks now” from the report
Gas safety paperwork
minorThe gas safety certificate was not in date when records were checked. The safety check was completed on the second inspection day and the manager later sent a copy of the certificate.
“With the exception of the gas safety certificate, all other certificates were within date.” from the report
Provider oversight
minorInspectors found no further documented provider checks after an August 2018 audit. They said this had not had a clear impact on people because the manager’s own systems were robust.
“there were no further documented checks by the provider.” from the report
- 01What activities are now offered, and how often can residents take part in them?
- 02How do you make sure all gas, electrical and equipment safety checks are completed and recorded on time?
- 03What provider-level checks have taken place since the inspection?
- 04How will you find out and respond to my relative’s personal preferences, interests and communication needs?
- 05How are medicines checked to make sure they are given as prescribed and recorded accurately?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including care, staffing, medicines, the premises, records and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 February 2019 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 Madeline McKenna Court
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2019GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 November 2017.
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 Halton
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. 89 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“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.