CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Manor House Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, October 2022
Manor House Residential Home is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found serious shortfalls in dignity, risk management, staff training and oversight.
Inspectors visited on 14 and 20 September 2022. The visit was unannounced. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and managers, and checked care records, staff files, training records and management audits.
The home was not always safe or caring. Inspectors saw people left without needed help during meals, food and dirty bibs left on clothes, and a wheelchair transfer carried out in a rushed way. Staff training, medicine competency checks and supervision were also incomplete.
There were some positive findings. Medicines were given safely, people's healthcare and dietary needs were generally supported, and relatives said they could raise concerns with the manager. However, the home's checks did not identify or follow up several problems.
The overall rating and all five key question ratings are Requires Improvement. This means the service was not consistently meeting the required standards. The provider was asked for an action plan, and CQC said it would monitor progress.
Medicines
People received their medicines as prescribed. Staff checked medicines before giving them and records were completed correctly.
“People received their medicines as prescribed in a safe way.” from the report
Healthcare support
Care plans recorded healthcare needs and the home worked with healthcare professionals when support was needed.
“Records showed that the provider liaised with healthcare professionals to support people.” from the report
Open management
Relatives and staff said the manager was approachable and that they could raise concerns.
“The registered manager had an open door policy and was open to feedback.” from the report
Personalised records
People had care plans and risk assessments containing information about their needs and preferences.
“There were individual care plans in place for people with associated risk assessments, these contained person centred information so staff could get to know people's preferences better.” from the report
People were not always kept safe during meals
seriousInspectors found staff did not always follow risk assessments. One person at very high risk from poor nutrition was eating without the observation and help set out in their care plan.
“There were no staff observing this person during the lunch period.” from the report
Dignity and safe moving
seriousInspectors saw rushed care, including a wheelchair transfer where feet were dragged along the floor and the person was not told what was happening.
“They did this in a rushed way, did not use the feet plates which meant the person's feet were being dragged along the floor and their slippers came off.” from the report
Staff training and supervision
seriousTraining was incomplete, including safeguarding and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards training. Medicine competency checks had not been completed for two staff members since 2019, and staff supervisions were overdue.
“Out of 16 staff, seven had not completed any safeguarding training, 11 had not had training in Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingPeople and relatives said activities could be better. Inspectors found people were not engaged by the television and music, and outdoor trips had not restarted after pandemic restrictions were lifted.
“No outdoor trips at the moment, we used to before Covid. We do activities in the garden but have not been out since the pandemic.” from the report
Environment needed updating
needs fixingCommunal areas were dated and some spaces were being used for storage. Inspectors said the layout did not meet people's emotional support needs.
“There was a large conservatory for people to use but this was being partly used as storage for wheelchairs, chairs and other pieces of equipment.” from the report
- 01What has been done to ensure staff follow people's risk assessments during meals and other high-risk care?
- 02How do you now check that staff have completed safeguarding, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and other required training?
- 03When was each staff member last assessed as competent to give medicines, and how are staff supervisions kept up to date?
- 04What changes have been made to activities, including trips outside the home, since the inspection?
- 05Which improvements have been completed to the communal areas and how are outstanding actions tracked?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 October 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.
Every inspection of Manor House Residential Home
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- October 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Manor House Residential Home →
- May 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Good
- January 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 November 2021.
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 Merton
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 £1,230 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
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.