CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Magnolia House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe recruitment, effective safeguarding systems and safe medicines practice. The home was clean and risks were assessed, although some hoist-sling records needed more detail and were corrected immediately.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had current, person-centred care plans and staff received induction, training and regular supervision. People were supported with food, drink, healthcare and lawful decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives said staff were kind and caring. Inspectors observed respectful care, with people's privacy, dignity, independence, choices and cultural needs supported.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences. Visitors were welcomed and activities were available, although some people said activities could be more varied and happen more often.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open and welcoming culture, approachable management and regular quality checks. People, relatives and staff were asked for feedback, and the home worked with outside agencies.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Magnolia House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with some refurbishment and activity improvements still needed.
Inspectors visited without warning on 7 November 2023. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and visiting healthcare professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, clean surroundings, suitable training and good links with healthcare professionals. People were treated with kindness, involved in choices and supported to keep relationships and interests.
There were some minor areas to improve. Some records needed more detail about hoist slings, although this was corrected immediately. Some parts of the home needed refurbishment, and some people wanted activities to be more varied and more frequent.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff knew people well and responded quickly to call bells.
“We observed enough staff to meet people’s needs, staff were visibly present and were quick to answer call bells.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw people treated with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect.
“We observed people being treated with kindness and compassion.” from the report
Good health support
The home worked well with visiting healthcare professionals and made referrals when needed. Professionals said staff raised concerns promptly when people's health declined.
“Staff access prompt care when people’s health is declining, they are good at raising issues with us or contacting emergency services if required.” from the report
Good management oversight
Regular audits covered records, medicines, infection control, maintenance and safeguarding. Feedback from people, relatives and staff was used to improve care.
“The provider had oversight and governance systems in place. Audits were undertaken regularly and included checks of records, medicines, IPC, maintenance, and safeguarding.” from the report
Some hoist records lacked detail
needs fixingSome records did not contain enough detail about people's hoist slings. The issue was brought to the manager's attention and corrected immediately.
“At the time of the inspection some improvements were needed to ensure records contained detail about people’s hoist slings.” from the report
Refurbishment still ongoing
minorSome areas of the home needed refurbishment. The provider had an ongoing plan, and some areas had already been redecorated.
“Some areas of the home needed of refurbishment. The provider had recognised this and there was an ongoing refurbishment plan in place to improve the environmental décor.” from the report
Activities could be more varied
minorSome people wanted activities to be more varied and more frequent. A recently appointed activities coordinator was developing daily plans and day trips.
“Some people told us activities could be more varied and take place more often.” from the report
- 01Which areas of the home are still awaiting refurbishment, and what is the timetable for completing the work?
- 02How are hoist-sling details checked now to make sure care records remain accurate?
- 03What new activities and day trips have been introduced since the inspection?
- 04How often are activities offered, and how are residents' interests used to plan them?
- 05How will relatives be kept informed about changes to care, activities and the refurbishment plan?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the premises; inspectors reviewed four care plans, four medicines records and three staff files. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 December 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 Magnolia House
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 October 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
16 live-in carers within about an hour of East Riding of Yorkshire
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 £1,030 to £1,420 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
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.