CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Manor Community Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Staffing levels, recruitment checks, risk assessments and medicine systems were found to protect people from avoidable harm. The home was clean and incidents were reviewed to help prevent them happening again.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff received induction, training and supervision. The home worked with healthcare professionals, followed dietician advice and supported people with appointments and mental health needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with dignity and respect and were involved in decisions about their care. Staff supported people to maintain important relationships and develop confidence and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were clear and person-centred. People were supported to enjoy individual interests, activities, community life and special events, and the home addressed concerns promptly.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a strong person-centred culture, regular audits and clear staff responsibilities. People and staff were involved in decisions and the provider used feedback and learning to improve the service.
What inspectors found, September 2019
Manor Community Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a strong focus on independence.
This was an unannounced scheduled inspection on 24 May 2019. One inspector reviewed information before the visit, spoke with people, relatives, staff, managers and visiting nurses, and checked care plans, medicine records and training records.
Inspectors found that people were safe and received good care and support. Staff understood people's mental health needs, worked with healthcare professionals and supported people to make choices, build skills and take part in activities and relationships that mattered to them.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The service had been rated Outstanding at its previous inspection in June 2016, so the overall rating had fallen to Good, although inspectors still found the legal requirements were met.
Personalised support
Staff knew people's needs and wishes well. They supported people to pursue interests, maintain relationships and work towards more independent living.
“People received highly personalised care that met their individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Mental health support
Staff felt confident supporting people during difficult periods of mental ill health. Visiting psychiatric nurses gave positive feedback about the care and communication.
“Staff understood people's mental health needs well and felt confident about managing any episodes when people were experiencing particularly difficult symptoms.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in care decisions and encouraged to develop practical skills such as cooking, budgeting and cleaning.
“People's independence was truly valued and promoted.” from the report
Strong leadership
The provider used audits, feedback, staff responsibilities and learning from incidents to monitor quality and improve care.
“There was a strong person-centred culture running through the service.” from the report
Rating had fallen since the previous inspection
minorThe previous inspection in June 2016 rated the service Outstanding. This inspection rated it Good, although the report found that legal requirements were met.
“The service was last inspected in June 2016 and rated Outstanding.” from the report
One person was not fully happy with the food
minorMost people were happy with the food, but one person was not completely satisfied. The inspector shared this with the manager.
“Only one person said they weren't completely happy with the food, and we shared this with the manager.” from the report
- 01The previous rating was Outstanding but this inspection was Good. What has changed since 2016, and what are you doing to improve further?
- 02How are residents involved in creating and changing their care plans and daily support?
- 03How do you support people when they experience particularly difficult mental health symptoms or thoughts of self-harm?
- 04How do you check that food choices meet each person's preferences, cultural needs and health needs?
- 05How can residents and relatives raise concerns, and how do you make sure these are acted on before they become formal complaints?
This was an unannounced scheduled inspection covering all five CQC questions, and all five ratings were given as Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 September 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.
What inspectors found, November 2016
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found safe, kind and highly personalised care, with outstanding caring and leadership.
This was an unannounced inspection on 27 and 28 June 2016. One inspector met all nine people living in the home and spoke individually with three of them. The inspector also spoke with the manager and five staff, and reviewed care records, staff records, policies, audits and other information.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Responsive. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe recruitment, staff training, safe medicines management and prompt access to health professionals. Care plans were detailed and personalised, and people were supported to follow their interests, make choices and take part in the community.
Caring and Well-led were rated Outstanding. Inspectors saw respectful relationships, strong support for independence and a clear focus on people's rights and wishes. Overall, Outstanding means the inspection found care and leadership that were exceptionally good in the areas considered at that time.
Strong relationships
Staff knew people well and treated them with warmth, respect and patience. Inspectors saw relationships based on trust and personalisation.
“It was evident that over time staff had built up positive relationships with people that were based on trust and personalisation.” from the report
Promoting independence
The home supported people to make their own decisions, manage everyday tasks and work towards more independent living. Two people had moved into supported living.
“Independence and autonomy was promoted at all times and was at the centre of all care and support people received.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's life experiences, interests, communication preferences and routines. Staff adapted support to each person's wishes and needs.
“They were personalised and included information on people's life experiences, interests, hobbies and likes and dislikes.” from the report
Leadership and improvement
Inspectors found motivated staff, open communication and regular checks on care, medicines, staffing and safety. The home had plans for further improvements.
“The provider strives for excellence through consultation, research and reflective practice.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How many staff are on duty now, and how do you increase staffing when someone's needs change?
- 02How are staff checked as competent before they administer medicines, and how often are those checks repeated?
- 03How are care plans reviewed with each person now, including for people who do not want formal monthly meetings?
- 04How do you support people to build independence or move towards supported living where that is their goal?
- 05How can families take part in meetings, reviews and feedback about the care provided?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions; the previous inspection was in April 2013. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 November 2016 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 Manor Community Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has slipped, from Outstanding to Good.
- September 2019Goodcurrent ratingdown from OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 January 2011.
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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Bristol, City of
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 £1,020 to £1,300 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She became a good friend to my mother in law, chatting with her, dancing with her, knitting with her and the list goes on”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.