CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Prestbury House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Prestbury House Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 February 2021. It checked infection prevention and control measures during the COVID-19 pandemic. The home was inspected but not rated overall.
Inspectors were assured that visitors were screened, protective equipment was used safely, testing was available and the home was clean. They also found individual COVID-19 risk assessments and training for staff.
Relatives spoke positively about communication, visits and the admission process. Because this was a focused inspection, it does not provide ratings or detailed findings about all areas of care.
Visitor safety
Visitors were screened, given face masks and provided with protective equipment and hand hygiene facilities.
“All visitors were asked to complete a health screening form, have their temperature checked and were provided with face masks to wear throughout their visit.” from the report
Clean environment
Cleaning schedules had been increased and inspectors found the environment clean and hygienic.
“The service had increased the cleaning schedules and routines to reduce the risks of cross infection. The environment was very clean and hygienic.” from the report
Testing and risk checks
People and staff took part in regular COVID-19 testing, and people had individual risk assessments for COVID-19.
“People and staff were taking part in regular COVID-19 testing.” from the report
Support for relatives
Relatives described visits and the admission process positively. The home used pre-booked screened visits and provided information about rooms during admission isolation.
“Relatives spoke positively about the admission process to the home during the pandemic.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now, and when was the policy last reviewed?
- 02How are visitors currently screened, and what protective equipment and hand hygiene facilities are provided?
- 03How often are residents and staff tested, and how are positive results managed?
- 04How are new residents admitted safely, including any isolation period and communication with relatives?
- 05Can you show us the home's latest full CQC inspection report and explain any ratings not covered by this inspection?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and other areas were not assessed in detail. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 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, February 2020
Rated Good overall, but Safe requires improvement because staff were not always deployed where people needed them.
Inspectors visited unannounced on 8 January 2020. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. Inspectors found kind and respectful care, personalised support, suitable staff training and regular checks on quality.
Safe remained Requires Improvement. Staffing levels had improved, but inspectors saw no staff in the main lounge on the first floor for 15 minutes at tea time. They also found worn furnishings, limited dementia-friendly signs and some recording and notification issues.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that staff knew people well and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect.
“People were treated with kindness and compassion. People described staff as kind and caring” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences. Staff were said to know how to support each person.
“Care plans instructed staff on how best to meet people's needs to achieve the intended outcome in a way the person preferred.” from the report
Improved staffing
Staffing levels had improved since the previous inspection, including through a new evening shift. Inspectors found enough staff for most of the day.
“There were adequate staff on shift. In the main people and staff felt the introduction of a 'twilight' shift covering 6pm to 11pm had improved staffing levels since the last inspection.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Medicine records were complete and checked regularly. Staff responsible for medicines had training and competency checks.
“Medicine administration records (MARS) were in place and had been fully completed.” from the report
Staff not always visible
seriousNo staff were present in the first-floor main lounge for 15 minutes at tea time. One person was becoming agitated and was at risk of hurting themselves.
“We observed a 15-minute period where no staff were present in the main lounge on the first floor.” from the report
Worn furnishings
needs fixingSome lounge furnishings were badly worn and presented an infection control risk. The home had identified this and planned replacements.
“Furnishings in some of the main lounges were badly worn and presented an infection control risk.” from the report
Limited dementia-friendly signs
minorSome areas had been adapted for people living with dementia, but there was not enough signage to help people find their way safely.
“The environment was generally well maintained but lacked dementia friendly signs to support people to orientate safely.” from the report
Incomplete care records
minorOne person's repositioning records had not been completed regularly. Some oral health needs were also missing or not detailed enough in care plans.
“One person's repositioning records had not been completed regularly.” from the report
- 01How will you make sure staff are always present in the first-floor lounge at busy times such as tea time?
- 02What action has been taken to replace the worn lounge furnishings, and has this work been completed?
- 03What dementia-friendly signs are now in place to help residents orientate around the home?
- 04How do you check that repositioning records and oral health care plans are complete and up to date?
- 05Have all safeguarding and CQC notifications been made promptly since the new registered manager started?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, following the previous Requires Improvement rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 February 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 Prestbury House Care Home
5 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- September 2017Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 August 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 Cheshire East
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. 87 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the home.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.