CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Moorland View Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found safe recruitment, appropriate staffing levels, effective risk management and safe infection control. Medicines were managed safely, although some minor improvements were needed to reflect national guidance.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had suitable induction, training and supervision. People received support with food, drink and healthcare, and staff worked with other professionals to meet people's needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- The report does not give a rating for Caring.
- Responsive?
- Good
- The report does not give a rating for Responsive.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear management responsibilities, effective audits and an open culture. People, relatives and staff said management listened to their views and was approachable.
What inspectors found, March 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, effective and well-led care, with minor improvements still needed in medicines, records and the building.
Inspectors visited on 7 and 8 March 2023. The first day was unannounced. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and health and social care professionals. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff files, training records, policies and audits.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective and Well-led were also rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff in general, safe recruitment, suitable risk checks, safe medicines management and good infection control. They found that people received care based on their needs, risks and preferences.
There were some minor areas to improve. Medicines processes did not fully reflect national guidance. Some care records about food and drink were not consistent with information held by catering staff. Parts of the building needed repair and redecoration.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement, published in October 2019, with breaches of regulation. Inspectors found that improvements had been made and the home was no longer in breach. Earlier recommendations about accidents, the dementia-friendly environment and quality checks had also been acted on.
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found that recruitment checks were completed and staffing levels were appropriate to people's needs. People and relatives said help was available when needed.
“The provider ensured staff were recruited safely. Appropriate pre-employment checks were carried out before staff started working at the home, to ensure they were suitable to support people living there.” from the report
Individual care
Care plans and risk assessments reflected people's needs, risks and preferences. Community professionals said staff knew people well and provided individualised care.
“People received care and support which reflected their assessed risks, needs and preferences.” from the report
Healthcare and nutrition
People were supported with their healthcare, diet and nutritional needs. Referrals were made for specialist help when needed.
“People were supported to eat and drink well. Care plans included information about people's dietary needs, risks and preferences.” from the report
Management and quality checks
Management carried out regular checks on medicines, infection control and the home environment. Inspectors found these audits helped maintain standards and led to timely action.
“The audits were effective in ensuring that appropriate standards of quality and safety were being maintained at the home.” from the report
Medicines processes
needs fixingMedicines were managed safely, but some processes did not fully match national guidance. Ask what changes have been made since the inspection.
“Some minor improvements were needed to ensure medicines management processes reflected National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance.” from the report
Care records and food information
needs fixingSome information about people's dietary needs and risks was not consistent between care records and catering information. This could make it harder for staff to rely on one clear record.
“Some minor improvements were needed to ensure that information in people's care records was consistent and reflected the information held by catering staff.” from the report
Repairs and redecoration
minorSome areas of the building needed repair and redecoration. The provider had an ongoing improvement plan, and some windows and flooring had already been replaced.
“The home needed repair and redecoration in some places, and we saw evidence that the provider had an ongoing improvement plan in place.” from the report
Short staffing at times
needs fixingStaff said they could struggle to support people without rushing when sickness or holidays caused staff shortages. The manager said more staff had been recruited and further recruitment was planned.
“Staff felt staffing levels were appropriate to meet people's needs, but told us they struggled to support people without rushing them, when the service was short staffed due to sickness or holidays.” from the report
- 01What medicines processes have you changed to reflect NICE guidance?
- 02How do you make sure dietary information in care plans matches the information given to catering staff?
- 03What repairs and redecoration are still outstanding, and when are they expected to be completed?
- 04How do you maintain enough staff when people are off sick or on holiday?
- 05What improvements have been made since the previous Requires Improvement rating?
The report gives ratings for Safe, Effective and Well-led; it does not give ratings for Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 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 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; this targeted inspection found good infection control and visiting arrangements, but did not rate Safe.
Inspectors visited the home on 12 January 2022 with one day's notice. This was a targeted inspection during the COVID-19 pandemic. It focused on infection prevention, visiting arrangements and whether staffing pressures were affecting care.
Inspectors found that staff had infection control training and used personal protective equipment correctly. The home was clean, had updated infection control procedures and took part in regular COVID-19 testing. Inspectors were also assured that visits, admissions, social distancing and outbreak management were being handled safely.
The home had created a visiting pod and used newsletters to keep relatives informed. The overall service rating was Requires Improvement, but Safe was inspected and not rated. The other four areas were not covered by this inspection.
Infection control training
Staff had training in infection control and the safe use of PPE. Inspectors saw staff wearing PPE in line with government guidance.
“Staff had received training on infection control and the safe use of personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Clean environment
The home was clean and had improved some bathrooms and flooring to support better cleaning.
“The provider had made improvements to bathroom areas and replaced some flooring to support enhanced cleaning in the home.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
The home created a visiting pod so relatives could meet people safely during the restrictions in place at the time.
“They had been creative in making use of the space in the home to create a 'pod' to enable visitors to meet people safely.” from the report
Keeping relatives informed
The home used newsletters on its website to update relatives about the situation in the home.
“They had developed a system of newsletters which they posted on their website to keep relatives informed about the situation in the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01The provider told inspectors there were measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures. How are staffing levels and pressures affecting people living here now?
- 02How do you check that all staff continue to use PPE safely and follow the current infection control policy?
- 03How are visits currently arranged, and is the visiting pod still being used when needed?
- 04How often are people living here and staff tested for COVID-19, and what happens if there is a positive result?
- 05How do you make sure staff and visiting professionals meet the COVID-19 vaccination requirements or have an exemption?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures; Safe was inspected but not rated, and the other four areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 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.
Every inspection of Moorland View Care Home
5 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2022Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 November 2010.
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 Blackburn with Darwen
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. 91 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
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.