CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Manor Residential Home (Arnold) Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risk assessments, staffing, recruitment, medicines and infection control were found to be managed safely, although some people reported slight delays in getting assistance.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received support with nutrition, healthcare and their individual needs. Staff had training and supervision, and the home followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People and relatives were involved in care planning and reviews. Managers used meetings, feedback and audits to monitor quality and improve the service.
What inspectors found, November 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, effective and well-led care, with some delays in responding to assistance calls.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 24 October 2023. Inspectors reviewed Safe, Effective and Well-led only. They spoke with 8 people, 2 relatives and 9 staff, and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment, training and management records.
The inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines were handled safely, staff were suitably trained, and there were enough competent staff on duty. People were supported with food, drink, healthcare and making their own choices.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Well-led. Caring and Responsive were not inspected during this visit, so no new ratings were given for those areas. The overall rating stayed Good, the same as at the previous inspection published on 20 November 2020.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe living at the home. Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse and understood people's individual risks.
“Everyone we spoke with told us they felt safe living at the home.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Reviews and risk assessments helped people remain as independent as possible.
“Medicines were stored correctly and disposed of safely. Staff kept accurate medicine records.” from the report
Skilled and supported staff
There were enough competent staff on duty, and recruitment checks were completed. Staff received induction, ongoing training, supervision and appraisals.
“There were enough competent staff on duty. Staff had the right mix of skills to make sure that practice was safe” from the report
Good involvement and feedback
People and relatives were involved in care planning and reviews. The home held monthly residents' meetings and acted on feedback about meals and activities.
“People and their relatives were now fully involved in care planning and reviews encouraging open and person-centred communication” from the report
Some delays in getting help
minorSome people said they sometimes waited a little for assistance. The home was developing new call bell technology to help staff respond more promptly.
“Some people told us that there could be a slight delay in waiting for assistance at times but if staff were needed in an emergency they were always there quickly.” from the report
Advice about timed medicines
minorInspectors gave advice about administering timed medicines. The manager acted immediately and updated staff, but this is an area families may wish to check is consistently followed.
“On inspection advice was given about administering timed medicines.” from the report
- 01How is the new individual call bell technology progressing, and what are the usual response times when someone asks for help?
- 02How do you make sure timed medicines are given at the correct time after the advice raised during the inspection?
- 03How will you keep families involved in care planning and reviews?
- 04What dementia care training are staff receiving, and when will the planned further training be in place?
- 05How do you use residents' feedback about meals and activities to make changes?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and the previous ratings were used in calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 November 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, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured the home had safe infection prevention and control arrangements.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 20 November 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, managing visitors, supporting social distancing, carrying out testing and keeping the premises clean. They also found arrangements for safe admissions and managing infections.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most of the five areas of care.
Safer visits
Visitors booked in advance and used a separate conservatory with a screen, allowing people to see relatives while reducing infection risks.
“Visitors were booked in advance and had use of a large conservatory to visit loved ones behind a screen with direct access from the garden.” from the report
Protective equipment
There was enough PPE, with stations around the home. Staff caring for people with COVID-19 were also given washable scrub suits.
“The provider ensured there was sufficient stock of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and PPE stations had been introduced around the home for staff to access.” from the report
Cleaning and hygiene
Cleaning of frequently touched areas had increased. The home had also introduced hands-free sanitiser and specialist cleaning machines.
“Cleaning of frequent touch points had been increased and cleaning fluids had been changed in response to COVID-19.” from the report
Support during isolation
When people were isolating in their rooms, staffing levels were increased and communal dining was stopped for the isolation period.
“Staff numbers had been increased to support people when isolated in their rooms.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently booked and supported to see residents safely?
- 02How do you check that staff use PPE correctly, and how often are PPE supplies reviewed?
- 03How are frequently touched areas cleaned now, and what equipment and cleaning products are used?
- 04What arrangements are in place if a resident needs to isolate in their room?
- 05When was the home last fully assessed for care quality in areas not covered by this inspection?
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 December 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 Residential Home (Arnold) Limited
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Manor Residential Home (Arnold) Limited →
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Manor Residential Home (Arnold) Limited →
- October 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014Inspected but not rated
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 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
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.