CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Primrose Villa Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Are people protected from harm? Staffing, medicines, infection control, safeguarding.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Audits, action plans, resident meetings and feedback systems had improved. Staff spoke positively about the management change and said they felt supported.
What inspectors found, April 2022
Primrose Villa Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found clear improvements in nutrition, dental care and management systems.
This was a focused inspection on 15 March 2022. The inspector checked whether the home had acted on recommendations from the previous inspection, which was rated Requires Improvement in November 2020. The inspector spoke with three residents, three care staff and managers, and reviewed care records, training records and audits.
The home had acted on all four previous recommendations. Weight loss was monitored properly, dental care had improved, and audits and action plans were clearer. People said they were happy, had choices, received enough food and drink, and could access healthcare.
The Effective and Well-led areas were rated Good. Infection prevention and control was checked, but Safe was not given a new rating. This was not a full inspection of every area, so some ratings came from the previous comprehensive inspection.
The report does not single out particular strengths.
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
This explanation was written from the published report of 6 April 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, November 2020
Primrose Villa Care Home is Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, choice-led care but weaknesses in weight monitoring, dental access and management checks.
This was a targeted inspection. Inspectors checked whether the home had acted on problems found at the previous inspection. They spoke with four residents and four care staff, reviewed six care records and examined training, supervision, audits and other management records.
The home was no longer breaching the regulations checked at this inspection. However, it still required improvement in the Effective and Well-led areas. Weight loss was not always assessed or recorded clearly, no residents were currently registered with a dentist, and some management checks and follow-up actions were not completed promptly.
Residents said they were happy, had choices and received enough food and drink. The overall rating remained Requires Improvement, as it had at the previous two inspections. The other key areas were not examined in this focused inspection, so their earlier ratings were carried forward.
Choice and consent
Residents were involved in planning and reviewing their care. They were offered choices and their consent was sought before care or support began.
“People told us they were happy with the care they received and were supported to make choices.” from the report
Food and drink
Residents said they had enough to eat and drink and could choose their meals. They spoke positively about the food.
“People told us they received enough to eat and drink, received a choice of meals and were complimentary about the standard of the food provided.” from the report
Healthcare access
Residents could access GPs, district nurses and podiatrists, and professional advice was recorded in care files.
“People had access to a range of medical and healthcare services, such as GP's, district nurses and podiatrists.” from the report
Residents' views
The home held quarterly resident meetings and used questionnaires to seek views. Actions from meetings were recorded.
“Resident meetings had been held quarterly in line with people's wishes, who had confirmed this timescale was suitable.” from the report
Weight loss records
needs fixingThe home's monitoring tool was not used correctly. It was not always clear whether action had been taken when residents lost weight unexpectedly.
“As a result it was not always clear whether action had been taken when people experienced unplanned weight loss.” from the report
Access to dentists
needs fixingResidents had basic oral health information but no specific oral health care plans. No residents spoken with were currently registered with a dentist.
“Nobody we spoke with was currently registered with a dentist, which the registered manager confirmed.” from the report
Management audits
needs fixingSome audits were completed less often than intended, and actions identified by audits were not always addressed promptly.
“We noted issues identified during the inspection had been picked up as part of their audit process; such as weight monitoring, although issues had not always been addressed in a timely manner.” from the report
Staff supervision
minorStaff supervision was not always a genuine two-way discussion. Staff said they were asked to read and sign a form prepared by the manager.
“Staff told us meetings consisted of being asked to read through a pre-prepared form completed by the registered manager and to sign it if they agreed with the content.” from the report
Team communication
minorStaff gave different accounts of how often team meetings took place, and attendance had not been recorded.
“Staff provided mixed feedback about the completion of team meetings and passing on of information.” from the report
- 01How do you now assess and record unplanned weight loss, and when would you seek professional advice?
- 02Which dentist or dental service can residents use, and how are individual oral health care plans maintained?
- 03How often does the manager complete each audit, and how do you track that identified actions are completed on time?
- 04How are staff given a proper opportunity to discuss concerns and development needs during supervision?
- 05How often are team meetings held, and how do you record attendance and pass on important information?
This was a targeted inspection of Effective and Well-led, with infection prevention and control also considered; the other key question ratings were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 November 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 Primrose Villa Care Home
6 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- April 2022Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2017Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2016InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 December 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 Wigan
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. 92 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“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.