CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Madison Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infection, using PPE safely, testing people and staff, managing outbreaks and facilitating visits in line with guidance.
- 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, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control and visiting arrangements were being managed safely.
This was a short-notice, targeted inspection on 26 January 2022. It looked at infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, and at whether staffing pressures were affecting people.
Inspectors found the home was clean and hygienic. Staff used protective equipment safely, supplies were available, and people and staff were tested regularly. The home had arrangements for safe admissions, visiting, outbreak management and social distancing.
This was not a full inspection and no overall quality rating was given. The Safe question was inspected but not rated.
Infection control
The home was clean and hygienic, with cleaning schedules and extra cleaning procedures in place. PPE stations were available around the building.
“The home was clean and hygienic. Cleaning schedules were in place and PPE stations placed around the home.” from the report
Safe use of PPE
Inspectors observed staff using PPE safely and were told there were sufficient supplies.
“During our visit we observed the staff using Personal Protective Equipment, (PPE) safely.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
Relatives were kept informed about changes to visiting. People could explain the testing and PPE process.
“Relatives told us they were kept up to date about any changes relating to visiting.” from the report
Testing and vaccination
People and staff were tested regularly. The report says the home met the requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals to be vaccinated.
“People living in the home and staff were tested regularly for COVID-19.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are infection prevention and control arrangements different now from those seen on 26 January 2022?
- 02How do you make sure there is enough PPE and hand sanitiser during staff shortages or an outbreak?
- 03What testing and vaccination checks are currently required for staff and visiting professionals?
- 04How will visiting work if there is an outbreak or a change in national guidance?
- 05What measures are in place now to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not provide a full service rating and Safe was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 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, April 2019
Madison Court was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some medicines improvements still being made.
This was a planned, unannounced inspection carried out on 30 January and 4 February 2019. Inspectors spoke with 22 people living in the home, 10 family members and 12 staff. They also checked care records, medicines records, training, recruitment and safety records.
The home provided personal and nursing care for up to 66 people, with 61 people living there at the time. Inspectors found that people's needs and wishes were assessed and recorded. Staff were trained, knew people well and generally provided kind, respectful and person-centred care.
People were found to be safe, their healthcare needs were met, and they were offered a choice of food and drinks. The home had systems to check quality and safety, learn from incidents and respond to complaints. All five CQC areas were rated Good.
The Good rating means the inspectors found the legal requirements were met and that people received good care. The report also says improvements were still being made following a recent medicines inspection, and that work to address hot water risks had been completed after the inspection visits.
Kind and respectful care
People and families said staff were kind, respectful and supportive. Inspectors saw positive relationships between staff and people.
“People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.” from the report
Safe staffing and safeguarding
Inspectors found safe recruitment, enough suitably trained staff and effective safeguarding procedures. People and families said they felt safe.
“Sufficient numbers of suitably trained and experienced staff were on duty to safely meet people's needs.” from the report
Good healthcare and nutrition
People had access to healthcare professionals, food, drinks and snacks. Staff understood people's healthcare needs and followed relevant professional guidance.
“People were protected from poor nutrition and dehydration.” from the report
Activities and family involvement
People could choose activities and take part in opportunities outside the home. Families were involved in care planning and received updates.
“People were provided with opportunities to access the local community by attending local schools, sporting events and dementia cafes within the local area.” from the report
Medicines improvements were still in progress
needs fixingA recent medicines inspection had identified areas needing further improvement. The home was working on these improvements at the time of this inspection.
“A recent inspection of medicines had been carried out by the Clinical Commissioning Group which had identified areas needing further improvement.” from the report
Hot water had sometimes been too hot
needs fixingSafety checks found that hot water temperatures had occasionally been too high, creating a potential risk. The report says the planned work to the water quality and heating systems was completed after the inspection visits.
“These checks had identified that the temperatures of the hot water available to people was on occasion too high.” from the report
- 01What specific improvements were identified in the recent medicines inspection, and how were they completed?
- 02How are medicines now checked to make sure they are given safely and at the right time?
- 03What work was carried out on the water quality and heating systems after inspectors found that hot water was sometimes too hot?
- 04How will you involve us in reviewing and updating our relative's care plan?
- 05What activities and community opportunities would be available for our relative, and how would their personal interests be included?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality and safety of the home; it was the first inspection under the current provider. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 April 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 Madison Court
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 February 2018.
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 St. Helens
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.
“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.”
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
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.