CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Manor Court Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were identified and managed, medicines were given safely, there were enough trained staff and safeguarding procedures were understood.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found experienced leadership, regular audits and a home improvement plan. People, relatives and staff were asked for their views and staff said managers were approachable and supportive.
What inspectors found, March 2023
Manor Court Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe care and stronger management systems after earlier concerns about risk management.
Inspectors visited on 16 and 21 February 2023. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also observed care and checked care, medicines, staffing, training, maintenance and quality records.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led. Both areas were rated Good. Inspectors found that risks to people's health had been assessed and managed, medicines were handled safely, staffing was sufficient and the home was clean.
The home had improved since the previous inspection, when it was rated Requires Improvement and breached Regulation 12 about safe care and treatment. The report says the improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach.
The overall Good rating includes ratings carried over from the previous inspection for the other three areas. Caring, Effective and Responsive were not assessed during this visit.
Improved risk management
The home had addressed the risk management problems found at the previous inspection. Risks to people's health and wellbeing were recorded, assessed and managed.
“Risks to people's health and wellbeing had been identified, assessed and managed.” from the report
Safe staffing
People and relatives said there were enough staff to respond to requests for help. Staff were regularly trained and the home did not need agency workers.
“There were enough trained staff to provide safe care to people.” from the report
Medicines handled safely
Inspectors found that medicines were ordered, given and disposed of safely. There were also instructions for medicines given only when needed and records for medicine patches.
“People received their medicines as prescribed and by trained staff.” from the report
Active quality checks
Managers and the provider carried out checks on areas such as medicines, infection control, the building, care plans and risk assessments. Actions were tracked through a home improvement plan.
“Where actions were identified, they were pulled through into a 'home improvement plan' which was regularly monitored to ensure identified actions were being addressed.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff said managers listened and were approachable. Staff described an open culture where they could discuss mistakes and improvements.
“There is a no blame culture, which encourages people to be open and honest about any mistakes they make.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you checking that each person's risks and care records remain up to date?
- 02How do you monitor medicines given only when needed, including whether they are still required?
- 03How do you make sure there are enough trained staff on every shift without agency staff?
- 04What happens to actions recorded in the home improvement plan, and how can relatives see progress?
- 05What are the arrangements for visiting if there is another infection outbreak?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 March 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.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Manor Court Home is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care but gaps in risk management, medicines and oversight.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 20 January 2020. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, risk records, medicines, staffing and management records.
People were generally treated with kindness and respect. They had choices about food and drink, could take part in activities, and said staff responded to their needs. Cleanliness, staffing, training and access to health services were also viewed positively.
Some safety risks had not been properly assessed or managed. Staff did not always follow guidance for protecting people's skin or giving skin-patch medicines. Audits did not always find these problems. The home remained rated Requires Improvement overall, with Safe and Well-led also rated Requires Improvement. Effective, Caring and Responsive improved to Good since the previous inspection.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives described staff positively. Inspectors saw people being treated with dignity and respect.
“People and relatives felt staff were kind and caring.” from the report
Food and drink choices
People could choose what they ate and drank. Feedback about the food was consistently positive.
“People were offered choices about what they ate and drank. People consistently gave positive feedback about the quality of the food.” from the report
Privacy and independence
Staff knocked before entering bedrooms and encouraged people to do what they could for themselves.
“People's privacy and dignity was maintained and respected by staff.” from the report
Activities and personal interests
The home had increased activity support, including group activities and one-to-one time. People could also continue hobbies and receive support with faith needs.
“We now have a designated staff member who offers four hours of activities each day.” from the report
Some risks were not assessed
seriousA person's catheter monitoring arrangements were not clear, and staff did not know what action to take if urine was not passed. Another person had left the home without staff knowing, but there was no specific monitoring plan.
“However, some individual risks had not been assessed. For example, one person's health condition posed potential risks to them of not passing urine.” from the report
Skin protection procedures were not always followed
seriousStaff did not consistently move pressure-relief cushions during transfers or position people's feet safely. Inspectors said this created risks of skin damage.
“However, staff did not always follow the training they had been given.” from the report
Audits did not find all problems
needs fixingEnvironmental and care plan checks missed some risks and outdated information. Medicines checks also missed a safety recall until inspectors asked questions.
“Care plan audits had not always identified gaps or out of date information.” from the report
Worn areas and exposed hot pipes
needs fixingSome décor was damaged and refurbishment was still under way. Exposed hot pipework created possible burn risks, although action was started during the inspection.
“The home had commenced a refurbishment plan which was much needed as some areas of the home were worn with damaged décor.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to assess and manage risks for people who may leave the home without support?
- 02How do you now check that staff follow the correct instructions for skin-patch medicines?
- 03How are staff checked to make sure pressure-relief cushions and safe moving techniques are used correctly?
- 04What did the provider's action plan promise after this inspection, and what has been completed?
- 05How often are care plans, environmental risks and medicine safety alerts now checked?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the premises, care provided and all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 February 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 Manor Court Home
5 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 July 2014.
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 Warwickshire
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 £950 to £1,260 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.