CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Magnolia House Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines, infection control, premises checks and staffing were managed safely, although some risk assessments and recruitment records needed improvement.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and reviewed, staff were trained, and people received support with food, drink and healthcare. There were a small number of training gaps, and one person's meat was too tough and could have presented a choking risk.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives said staff were kind, caring and respectful. Staff promoted privacy, dignity, independence and people's everyday choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and communication methods. People were supported to keep in touch with relatives, take part in activities and raise complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a positive culture and consistent management team. Quality checks were in place, and managers acted promptly on the minor concerns identified during the inspection.
What inspectors found, December 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records and training gaps to address.
The inspection was unannounced. Inspectors visited the home on 7 December 2021, spoke with people, relatives, staff and a visiting professional, and checked care records, staff files, medicines and quality systems.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, received medicines safely, and lived in a clean home with enough staff to meet their needs.
People and relatives described kind and respectful staff. Care was personalised, people were supported to make choices, and activities helped reduce the risk of isolation. The management team was described as approachable and responsive.
The report also records some issues. Some moving and handling risk assessments lacked detail, full references were not always obtained for two new staff, and there were a small number of training gaps. The manager acted on these points during or after the inspection.
People felt safe
Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks were assessed and safety measures were put in place.
“People were safe and protected from avoidable harm and abuse.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as caring and compassionate. Staff respected privacy and dignity and supported people's independence.
“People were treated with kindness and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's likes, dislikes, history and preferences. Staff knew people well and adapted support to their needs.
“People received personalised care that met their needs and preferences.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to maintain contact with relatives and take part in meaningful activities. Staff also visited people who preferred to spend time in their rooms.
“An activity co-ordinator provided meaningful activities and stimulation to people.” from the report
Responsive management
The management team had systems to monitor quality and acted quickly when inspectors raised minor concerns.
“The management team had been very responsive following our initial inspection feedback and immediately addressed the minor concerns we had highlighted.” from the report
Risk assessments lacked detail
needs fixingSome moving and handling assessments did not say which sling should be used or where it was kept. The management team reviewed these after inspectors raised the issue.
“However, the moving and handling risk assessments we looked at missed some details, for example what type of sling should be used or its location.” from the report
References were incomplete
needs fixingFull references had not always been obtained for two newly employed staff. The manager later showed inspectors that risk assessments had been completed.
“However, recruitment records for two newly employed staff showed full references were not always obtained.” from the report
Training gaps
needs fixingThe training record showed a small number of gaps in mandatory training. The manager said these would be completed as soon as practicable.
“There were a small number of gaps, but the registered manager assured us they would ensure staff completed their mandatory training as soon as this was practicable.” from the report
- 01Have all moving and handling risk assessments been updated, including the correct sling and its location?
- 02Have full references now been obtained for the two newly employed staff, and what risk checks were completed while this was outstanding?
- 03Which mandatory training was missing at the inspection, and has all of it now been completed?
- 04What changes were made to meals after inspectors found that one person's meat was too tough?
- 05How will the home continue to provide activities and contact with relatives for people who may be at risk of social isolation?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and infection prevention and control; the previous focused infection control inspection in 2020 was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 December 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, November 2020
Magnolia House Residential Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The CQC made an announced, targeted inspection on 05 November 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control, including visitors, testing, protective equipment, cleaning and managing outbreaks.
Inspectors were assured that the home had safe arrangements in these areas. Visitors had checks, staff and residents were tested regularly, protective equipment was available, and enhanced cleaning was taking place.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating and did not assess all five areas of care.
Visitor safety
The home had checks and protective measures for visitors, including relatives and healthcare professionals, to reduce the risk of infection entering the home.
“Safe procedures were in place for visitors to the service, including healthcare professionals and relatives to reduce and prevent the spread of infection.” from the report
Regular testing
There was a regular testing programme for staff and residents, allowing the home to act quickly when tests were positive.
“There was a clear regular programme for staff and people living in the home to be tested for COVID-19.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff knew how to put on and remove protective equipment safely. Supplies were available and information was displayed in accessible formats.
“Staff were knowledgeable of procedures for don and doffing PPE and how to dispose of it safely, in line with GOV.uk guidelines.” from the report
Cleaning
Enhanced cleaning covered frequently touched areas and equipment. Housekeeping staff were allocated to specific areas of the home.
“Enhanced cleaning took place throughout the home including high touch areas, such as, door handles, handrails and equipment.” from the report
Planning for outbreaks
The home had contingency and winter plans, and arrangements for people who needed to isolate while still receiving individual activities.
“A clear contingency and winter plan were in place which was used should positive testing or isolation arise.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What has changed in your infection prevention and control arrangements since the inspection on 05 November 2020?
- 02How often are residents and staff currently tested, and what happens when someone receives a positive result?
- 03How do you support residents who find it difficult to stay in their rooms during isolation?
- 04How do you keep the other areas of care, such as medicines, staffing and activities, safe and well managed?
- 05How do you check that cleaning of high-touch areas and equipment is being completed consistently?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas of care were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 November 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 Magnolia House Residential Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Magnolia House Residential Care Home →
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Magnolia House Residential Care Home →
- January 2019GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 July 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
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
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. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
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.