CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Stansfield Hall Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding effective care and strong findings about safety, kindness, activities and leadership.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 23 and 25 October 2019. One inspector observed care, spoke with eight people, four relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines, staffing, recruitment, training, complaints and safety checks.
The inspectors found that people felt safe and were treated with kindness and respect. Staff knew people's needs well, supported their choices, kept the home clean and helped people stay connected with relatives, activities and interests.
The service was rated Outstanding for Effective and Good for Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The overall rating was Good. The Effective rating improved from Good at the previous inspection, published on 29 May 2017, while the other ratings stayed Good.
Health and oral care
Inspectors found that staff were alert to changes in people's health and proactive about oral hygiene. The report links this work with fewer hospital admissions and antibiotic prescriptions.
“There had been a significant reduction in the number of hospital admissions and of antibiotics being prescribed with only one prescription issued in the past nine months.” from the report
Well-trained staff
Staff completed a comprehensive induction, worked off the rota until they were confident and competent, and received ongoing supervision and training.
“All staff were provided with consistent ongoing support and supervision.” from the report
Choice and respect
People were supported to make daily choices and were treated with dignity. Staff understood people's preferences and provided care in a person-centred way.
“Staff made sure people were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and supported them in the least restrictive way possible.” from the report
Activities and family contact
People had regular activities and were supported to maintain relationships, hobbies and interests. Relatives said they were welcomed and the home had a family atmosphere.
“People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends, to maintain their hobbies and develop new interests.” from the report
Strong management
The management team was active in the day-to-day running of the home. Inspectors found clear responsibilities, good communication and effective quality monitoring.
“The management team were active in all aspects of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently monitor oral health, and have the improvements described in the report continued?
- 02How do you assess staffing needs when people's care needs change or staff are absent?
- 03How are my relative's food preferences, cultural or religious needs and swallowing or nutrition risks recorded and followed?
- 04What activities are available for someone with my relative's interests, and how do you support family visits?
- 05How will you involve my relative and our family in decisions about care, including future end of life wishes?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the Effective rating improving from Good to Outstanding and the other ratings remaining Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 December 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.
What inspectors found, April 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and responsive care, with some medicines recording and staff training issues to check.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 15 and 16 March 2017. One adult social care inspector and an expert by experience visited the home. They spoke with people, visitors and staff, observed care, and checked care records, medicines, staff files, training, rotas and quality checks.
The inspectors rated the home Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. They found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments and generally safe medicines arrangements. The home was clean and people’s health, nutrition and personal care needs were monitored.
People and visitors spoke positively about the staff and manager. Inspectors saw respectful care and found that staff knew people’s preferences and life histories. Care plans were detailed and regularly updated, and activities, complaints arrangements and quality checks were in place.
There were some weaknesses. Two medicines records were missing a staff signature and two as-required medicine stock records were inaccurate, although the report says people received their medicines as prescribed. Most staff did not fully understand the legal rules about consent and restrictions, so further training was being arranged.
Kind and respectful staff
People and visitors consistently praised the staff. Inspectors saw staff treating people with dignity, respect and patience.
“People spoke positively of the kindness and caring attitude of the staff. We saw that staff treated people with dignity, respect and patience.” from the report
Staff knew people well
Staff understood people’s likes, dislikes, life histories and routines. Care was adapted to individual preferences and needs.
“They knew them well and knew their likes and dislikes. They were able to tell us about people's life histories and what was important to them.” from the report
Detailed care planning
Care plans gave staff useful information about people’s health, routines, preferences and risks. Records were reviewed and updated when needs changed.
“The records we looked at gave sufficient detail to guide staff on how to provide support to people in a way that met their needs and preferences.” from the report
Strong management checks
The home had regular checks covering care, medicines, staffing, accidents, complaints, training and other areas of quality and safety.
“We found there were good systems of weekly, monthly and annual quality assurance check and audits.” from the report
Safe staffing and recruitment
The inspectors found safe recruitment procedures and enough staff to support people. Call bells were answered promptly during the inspection.
“The recruitment of staff was safe and there were sufficient staff to provide the support people needed.” from the report
Medicines records were not always complete
needs fixingTwo administration records lacked a staff signature at one time, and two stock records for as-required medicines were inaccurate. The report says the medicines had been given as prescribed and more frequent audits were arranged.
“We saw records were complete except in two records where a staff signature was missing on one administration time.” from the report
Some staff needed legal rights training
needs fixingMost staff spoken with did not fully understand the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The manager said further training was being organised.
“However we found that most staff we spoke with did not have a good understanding of MCA & DoLS” from the report
Some belongings went missing temporarily
minorA visitor said a hearing aid and glasses had gone missing for a while, although the home later found both items.
“Occasionally, things have gone missing. For example her hearing aid went missing for a while, then at a later time her glasses too” from the report
- 01What changes were made to medicine checks after the missing signatures and inaccurate as-required medicine stock records were found?
- 02Have all staff completed the further Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards training that was being arranged?
- 03How do you prevent hearing aids, glasses and other personal belongings from going missing?
- 04What activities are now available, especially for people living with dementia?
- 05How are families involved in reviewing care plans and decisions about consent or best interests?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 April 2017 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 Stansfield Hall Care Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 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 Rochdale
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”
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.