CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Mere Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found safe recruitment, enough staff to meet people's needs, suitable risk assessments and safeguarding systems. Some topical medicines lacked clear instructions, but the service took action after the inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found systems to monitor quality, approachable managers and staff who knew people well. Some action on environmental shortfalls had been delayed during COVID-19 outbreaks.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care and improved infection control, with some medicines instructions and building works still needing attention.
This was an announced, focused inspection. One inspector visited on 20 and 25 January 2022. The inspection looked mainly at safety, infection control and how the home was managed.
Inspectors observed staff supporting people, spoke with relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines records, recruitment and training files, and management records. They found enough trained staff, safe recruitment checks and systems to manage risks, safeguarding and medicines.
The home had improved its infection control and environment since the previous inspection. Some repair work was still outstanding, and some topical medicines did not have clear instructions, but action was taken about this after the inspection.
The overall rating was Good. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used for the overall rating.
Improved infection control
The environment had improved since the previous inspection. The provider had measures in place for PPE, testing, visits, vaccination checks and managing infection outbreaks.
“At this inspection, we found the provider had made significant improvements and the environment was being repaired.” from the report
Risk and safeguarding systems
People's risks were assessed and care plans explained how staff should support them safely. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse.
“People's care plans contained person-centred information and guidance on how staff could support people safely.” from the report
Trained staff and safe recruitment
Inspectors found safe recruitment checks, ongoing staff training and staff deployed to meet people's needs.
“The provider continued to conduct safe recruitment checks on staff.” from the report
Person-centred support
Staff knew people well, supported their interests and responded quickly when someone became distressed. People could personalise their rooms and have a say in their care.
“Managers and staff understood their roles, responsibilities and knew people well.” from the report
Unclear topical medicine instructions
needs fixingSome creams did not have clear written instructions about where they should be applied. The service manager took action after the inspection.
“Some topical medicines prescribed did not have clear written directives to guide staff on where the cream should be applied.” from the report
Some repair work remained
needs fixingSome environmental work was still outstanding. Inspectors said action had sometimes been delayed because of COVID-19 outbreaks, although a plan was in place.
“Whilst there were still some works to be carried out, the provider had a plan in place to address these shortfalls in a timely way.” from the report
- 01Have the written instructions for all topical medicines now been completed and checked?
- 02Which environmental repairs were still outstanding at the inspection, and have they now all been completed?
- 03How is the service being overseen while the registered manager is on leave?
- 04How many staff are usually on duty, and how do you respond when extra staff are needed?
- 05How are care plans reviewed when a person's anxiety, distress or mobility changes?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection prevention and control; the other ratings carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 February 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.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good PPE and testing arrangements, but infection control problems remained.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 7 April 2021. One inspector checked infection prevention and control after refurbishment work. They spoke with three people, observed care, reviewed records and looked around the home.
Some improvements had been made. Flooring in lounges and corridors had been replaced, some areas had been decorated, and staff used PPE appropriately. The home also carried out COVID-19 testing, encouraged hand hygiene and used approved disinfectants.
Problems remained with the laundry flooring, unpainted wood on doors and the storage and disinfection of mops. Inspectors said these issues increased the risk of infection spreading. This was a breach of Regulation 12(2)(h).
The overall service was inspected but not rated. The Safe rating remained Good from the last inspection, but inspectors only checked the specific infection control concerns. All key questions will be assessed at the next comprehensive inspection.
PPE was available and used
The home had a continuing supply of masks, gloves, aprons and hand sanitiser. Inspectors saw staff using PPE appropriately, and used PPE was disposed of in pedal bins.
“The provider had obtained a continuing supply of personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Regular COVID-19 testing
People living in the home and staff took part in regular COVID-19 testing. This was intended to allow prompt action after a positive result.
“The provider participated in regular COVID-19 testing of people living in the service and staff.” from the report
Hand hygiene
Staff encouraged people to wash their hands and offered hand sanitiser when this was not possible.
“Staff encouraged people to wash their hands frequently throughout the day.” from the report
Staff team arrangements
Staff worked in allocated teams, which inspectors said reduced the potential for infection to spread between staff members.
“Staff worked in allocated teams which lessened the potential of cross infection between staff members.” from the report
Cleaning and building defects
needs fixingThe laundry flooring could not be properly disinfected, and some doors still had unpainted wood. These issues could make infection control less effective.
“Some areas of the service were still not well maintained.” from the report
Mops were not safely managed
seriousMops were stored outside where they were exposed to weather and possible contaminants. There was no clear programme for changing or disinfecting mop heads.
“There was no defined plan of mop head changing or disinfection programme that would reduce the potential of cross contamination.” from the report
Risk of infection spread
seriousInspectors said the problems with cleaning and disinfection created a higher risk of infection spreading between people and staff.
“These areas compromised infection control measures and the effectiveness of cleaning and disinfection, which meant there was a higher risk of infection spread between people and staff.” from the report
- 01Has the laundry flooring been replaced so it can be properly disinfected?
- 02Have all areas of unpainted wood on doors been dealt with?
- 03Where are mops stored now, and what is the current schedule for changing and disinfecting mop heads?
- 04What improvements were made under the plan for floor disinfection and equipment sterilisation?
- 05When is the next comprehensive inspection expected, and what ratings currently apply to the other key questions?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control within Safe; the other key questions were not assessed and the Safe rating carried over as Good from the last inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 April 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.
Every inspection of Mere Lodge
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014Inspected but not rated
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 March 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leicester
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 £1,270 a week. 83 can care for a couple. 12 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.”
“Tino was the most wonderfully rounded, empathetic and intuitive person. He not only developed a great relationship with Neville but also had a great working relationship with our existing carer.”
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.