CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Stanley House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Stanley House rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and effective management during a focused inspection.
The inspection took place on 21 October 2021 after concerns about staff culture at another home on the same site. Inspectors found no evidence that people at this home were at risk of harm from that concern.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led. Inspectors spoke with people and staff, observed care, checked care and medicines records, and reviewed management, training and quality records. Both areas were rated Good.
People said they felt safe and described staff as kind and caring. Medicines, recruitment, infection control, risk management and safeguarding systems were found to be safe. The overall rating remained Good, as the other three ratings were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection.
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, ordered, administered and returned through established systems. Only trained staff administered medicines and records were comprehensive.
“Medicines were only administered by staff who had the correct training to do so and comprehensive records were maintained.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives were positive about the care. Staff knew people well, supported their choices and treated them with dignity and respect.
“People were positive about their care and support and told us the staff were kind, caring and knew them well.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The home recorded incidents, investigated them and took action, including involving other professionals when needed.
“Incidents and accident records contained good information in relation to the incident, the investigation undertaken, and the actions taken” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, supported testing and visits, and had arrangements to prevent or manage outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Manager registration
minorA new manager was in post but had not yet registered with the CQC when inspectors visited. The provider remained legally responsible for how the home was run.
“At the time of the inspection the service had a manager in post, but they were not yet registered with the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
Recruitment still under way
minorThere were enough staff to meet people's needs safely at the inspection, but the provider was recruiting additional staff to maintain safety needs.
“The provider is in the process of recruiting additional staff to ensure people's safety needs continue to be met.” from the report
- 01Has the manager now registered with the CQC, and who is legally responsible for the home while registration is pending?
- 02What progress has been made with recruiting additional staff since the inspection?
- 03How will you make sure medicines remain safely recorded and administered by trained staff?
- 04How are people and their relatives involved in updating risk assessments and care plans?
- 05How do you manage COVID-19 outbreaks and support visits from family members?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the Effective, Caring and Responsive ratings were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 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.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Stanley House is rated Good; inspectors found that earlier safety and management problems had been addressed.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 3 November 2020. Two inspectors spoke with people using the service, staff and relatives, and checked care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home had improved since its previous inspection, when it was rated Requires Improvement. Fire safety problems had been addressed. Medicines were stored, given and disposed of safely, and new checks were in place to reduce missed medicines.
Inspectors found that people's risks were identified and reviewed. Staff recruitment records had improved, infection control arrangements were in place, and people and relatives said staff were approachable and provided safe care.
The overall rating changed to Good. This inspection directly assessed Safe and Well-led. The other three question ratings were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection because inspectors found no new concerns in those areas.
Improved fire safety
Problems found at the previous inspection had been corrected. Fire exits and equipment were clear, and sluice doors were locked.
“We noted fire exits and fire extinguishers were now clear of obstructions and sluice doors were locked.” from the report
Safer medicines practice
Medicines were handled safely, and staff had recent medicines training. Daily counts and regular audits had been introduced.
“Medicines were received, stored, administered and disposed of safely.” from the report
Risk management
People's risks were recorded on an electronic system and reviewed regularly. Staff knew how to respond to risks affecting people's safety and wellbeing.
“Risks to people's health, safety or well-being were identified and regularly reviewed to manage people's changing needs.” from the report
Open leadership
Inspectors found a clear management structure and quality checks that had addressed earlier shortfalls. Relatives and staff described the manager as approachable and willing to listen.
“The provider had a clear management structure and staff were clear about their individual responsibilities.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements for preventing and managing infection, including safe use of protective equipment, testing and social distancing.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are daily medicine counts and regular medicines audits checked, and what happens if a missed medicine is found?
- 02How do you keep fire exits, fire extinguishers and sluice doors safe and clear?
- 03How many agency staff are currently being used, and how do you make sure they know each resident's needs?
- 04How often are individual risks reviewed, and how are changes shared with staff?
- 05Has the manager completed registration with the CQC, and who is responsible for the home while this is being completed?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection control; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 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 Stanley House
5 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- November 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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
11 live-in carers within about an hour of Herefordshire, County of
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 £960 to £1,410 a week. 10 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.