CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oldfield Manor
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home had effective infection prevention and control measures, including PPE, testing, cleaning, visiting arrangements and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- Not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- Not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were effective.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 24 February 2021. It focused on how the home was preventing and controlling COVID-19 infections.
Inspectors were assured about visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, cleaning, outbreak planning and the infection control policy. They saw staff wearing protective equipment correctly and found regular cleaning and testing arrangements.
The home had plans for outbreaks and ways for residents to keep in touch with relatives. This inspection did not give an overall quality rating. The Safe question was recorded as inspected but not rated.
Infection control planning
The home had detailed policies, risk assessments and an outbreak plan. These were updated when national guidance changed.
“The home had comprehensive policies and procedures to manage any risks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.” from the report
Protective equipment and training
There was enough protective equipment for staff and visitors. Staff had training and inspectors saw it being used correctly.
“There was an ample supply of PPE for staff and any visitors to use.” from the report
Cleaning and testing
The home had daily cleaning schedules, extra cleaning of frequently touched areas and regular COVID-19 testing for residents and staff.
“The five questions we ask about services and what we found” from the report
Contact with relatives
Residents and their next of kin could keep in touch through visiting appointments, video calls and telephone calls.
“People living in the home and their next of kin were supported to maintain contact through a range of methods including visit appointments in a 'pod' or 'booth', skype video and the telephone.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorInspectors directed the provider to resources to develop its approach. The report does not explain what specific improvement was needed.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the infection prevention and control approach since this inspection?
- 02How are visitors currently screened and supported to prevent infections spreading?
- 03How often are residents and staff tested, and what happens after a positive result?
- 04What did the home do with the resources signposted by inspectors to develop its approach?
- 05How will residents keep in touch with relatives if visiting arrangements change?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, recorded under Safe; it did not rate the other four CQC questions or give an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 March 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.
What inspectors found, September 2019
Oldfield Manor was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care with Outstanding support for people's individual needs and activities.
This was an unannounced inspection on 23 July 2019. One inspector spoke with seven people, two relatives, five staff members and a healthcare professional. They also observed care and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led were rated Good. Responsive was rated Outstanding because care was highly personal, staff understood people's goals, and people were supported to build relationships, take part in activities and avoid isolation.
Inspectors found people felt safe, medicines were managed safely, staff were trained, and care was kind and respectful. They also found that care plans recorded people's choices and preferences well. Three applications to deprive people of their liberty were still awaiting authorisation at the time of the inspection.
Highly personal care
Care plans recorded people's needs, choices and preferences in detail. Inspectors saw very positive outcomes, including improvements in health and wellbeing.
“People received care and support that was exceptionally person-centred and was embedded in the service.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People received strong support to maintain relationships, use community facilities and take part in activities. Inspectors saw examples of people becoming less isolated and achieving personal goals.
“People were exceptionally well supported to take part in activities to avoid social isolation.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People appeared comfortable with staff. Staff supported privacy, dignity, choice and independence.
“Staff interacted with people in a kind, caring, sensitive and respectful manner.” from the report
Safe systems
Inspectors found effective systems for managing risks, medicines, accidents, recruitment, equipment and infection control.
“The registered manager had effective systems and processes in place to assess and manage risks.” from the report
Authorisations were pending
minorThree applications to deprive people of their liberty were awaiting authorisation during the inspection. The report says care was being provided in people's best interests while they waited.
“The registered manager had made three applications to deprive people of their liberty, however, they were awaiting authorisation of these.” from the report
Survey results not yet analysed
minorThe home had sent out feedback surveys, but the results had not been analysed when inspectors visited. Ask how this feedback was later reviewed and acted on.
“Surveys had been sent out, but the results had not been analysed at the time of our inspection.” from the report
- 01What happened with the three applications for authorisation under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards?
- 02How were the feedback survey results analysed after the inspection, and what changes followed?
- 03How would you create a personalised care and activities plan based on my relative's interests, relationships and goals?
- 04How often would my relative's care plans and risk assessments be reviewed if their needs changed?
- 05How would you support my relative to remain independent and avoid becoming socially isolated?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; the report says the previous overall rating was Good and Responsive improved from Good to Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 September 2019 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 Oldfield Manor
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- May 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 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
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.