CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Salisbury House Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, following social distancing rules, testing people and staff, and managing infection risks.
- 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
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and safe visiting arrangements during the pandemic.
Inspectors visited on 22 December 2020. The visit was announced and focused on infection prevention and control because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.
They found safe arrangements for visitors, including a purpose-built cabin and special arrangements for essential end-of-life visits. New residents needed evidence of a negative COVID-19 test.
The home had enough protective equipment, regular COVID-19 testing, cleaning schedules and clear guidance for staff. Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed safely.
This was not a full inspection of the home. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Safe visiting
Visits were limited to essential visitors, with arrangements for people receiving end-of-life care. A COVID-19 secure cabin was available for visitors and professionals.
“A purpose built Covid-19 secure cabin had been built on site for visitors and professionals to use.” from the report
Protective equipment
The home had sufficient protective equipment, and staff used and disposed of it correctly.
“Sufficient supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE) were well placed and staff used and disposed of it correctly.” from the report
Testing and admissions
People and staff could access regular COVID-19 testing. New people were admitted only after evidence of a negative test.
“People were only admitted to the home following evidence of a negative COVID-19 test.” from the report
Communication
The manager and staff kept families informed and worked with other professionals involved in people's care.
“The registered manager and staff communicated regularly with family of people living in the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Are visits still restricted, and what arrangements are available for essential and end-of-life visits?
- 02How often are people living in the home and staff tested for COVID-19 now?
- 03What evidence of infection testing is required before someone is admitted?
- 04How would you manage a new infection or outbreak in the home?
- 05How will you keep our family informed about changes to visiting or infection control arrangements?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and other areas of care were not assessed in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 January 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, July 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with no serious risks or concerns identified.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 5 and 10 July 2018. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a visiting healthcare professional. They observed care, mealtimes and medicines, and checked care records, staff files, accident records, audits and other documents.
Inspectors found that people were safe and received their medicines properly. Staff were trained, checks were made before they started work, and there were enough staff to meet people's needs. The home was clean and risks were assessed and managed.
People were supported with their health, food, drink and daily choices. Inspectors saw kind and respectful care, personalised rooms, regular activities and involvement in care planning. Complaints were recorded and responded to, and the management team was described as approachable.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home was also rated Good at the previous inspection on 15 January 2016, and inspectors said the evidence supported the same rating.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives consistently praised the staff team. Inspectors observed sensitive and respectful care throughout the visit.
“Everyone we spoke with spoke highly of the caring and respectful attitude of a consistent staff team which they knew well.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Only trained staff whose skills had been checked administered medicines. Inspectors saw medicines given discreetly, respectfully and safely.
“We saw that they administered medicines to people in a discreet and respectful way and stayed with them until they had taken them safely.” from the report
Good activities and choice
The home offered daily activities and regular trips, based on what people found enjoyable and meaningful. Activity records were used to help keep activities relevant.
“Minibus trips out to places people enjoyed such as to the theatre, meals out at café's and pubs, visiting the dementia friendly singing café, barge trips and other destinations people had chosen, took place weekly.” from the report
Well-supported staff
Staff received induction, training updates, supervision and appraisals. They said the management team supported them well and helped them develop.
“Staff also told us they felt very well supported by the management team and received a planned annual appraisal of their performance.” from the report
People involved in their care
People and relatives were involved in care planning where possible. Care plans were detailed, relevant and reviewed regularly.
“The care plans were detailed and gave descriptions of people's needs and the support staff should give to meet these.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and review my relative's care needs before they move in?
- 02How would you support my relative's specific dietary, hydration or health needs?
- 03What daily activities and outings would be suitable for my relative, and how would you involve them in choosing?
- 04How would you support my relative to remain independent while keeping them safe?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in care plan reviews and decisions about end of life care?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall quality of the home, covering all five key questions; the Good ratings had also been given at the inspection on 15 January 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 July 2018 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 Salisbury House Residential Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Salisbury House Residential Home →
- July 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Salisbury House Residential Home →
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Wirral
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 £1,230 a week. 37 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“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.