CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Dell
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People had risk assessments, safe medicines systems and enough staff. Inspectors were assured that infection control, PPE, testing and COVID-19 vaccination requirements were being managed.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the training and supervision needed for their roles. People received support with eating, drinking, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw positive, respectful interactions. People were supported with dignity, privacy, independence and choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and staff understood people's needs. People were supported with activities, relationships, communication and end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Leadership, staff morale and day-to-day quality checks were positive. Inspectors recommended formal audits by the provider to give better oversight of the home.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with provider-level oversight still needing improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection from 8 to 10 February 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care and activities, and checked care, medicines, recruitment, complaints and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and were happy. Inspectors saw enough staff, kind interactions, personalised care, safe medicines practice and suitable infection control measures.
The new provider and manager had strengthened leadership and quality checks. However, inspectors recommended formal audits at provider level, and asked the home to record relatives' involvement in care reviews more clearly.
Kind and respectful care
People described the care positively, and inspectors saw staff being attentive, respectful and caring.
“We observed a kind and caring culture.” from the report
Enough staff
People and staff said staffing levels were sufficient. Inspectors saw people supported promptly and staff did not appear rushed.
“Our observations confirmed the service had enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans gave staff detailed information about people's needs and preferences. Staff knew people well and responded to changes in their needs.
“People's support plans were person-centred and comprehensive providing information and guidance about people's health and care needs, and how best to support them.” from the report
Activities and relationships
The home offered group and individual activities and supported people to stay in touch with family and the local community.
“There was an enthusiastic activities coordinator employed, who had developed a full programme of activities.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored securely, staff were trained and medicines records checked by inspectors were completed correctly.
“The MARs we looked at were completed correctly.” from the report
Provider oversight
needs fixingThe home had its own quality checks, but inspectors found no formal audits by the provider. They recommended introducing these to show that the provider was checking safety and quality regularly.
“We found no formal audits were undertaken at provider level to ensure they were regularly to assessing and monitoring the safety of the service provided.” from the report
Recording relatives' involvement
minorRelatives were meant to be involved in monthly care reviews, but the home needed to record this involvement more clearly.
“We encouraged the registered manager to ensure people's relatives are contacted to ensure they are involved in this process.” from the report
- 01What formal provider-level audits have you introduced since the inspection, and what have they found?
- 02How are relatives invited to monthly care reviews, and how is their involvement recorded?
- 03What progress has been made with the planned bathroom upgrades?
- 04How will you make sure care plans continue to reflect changes in a person's needs and preferences?
- 05How are activities adapted for people living with dementia or people in short-term intermediate care placements?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control; all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 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, May 2021
The Dell was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and coronavirus safety arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 28 April 2021. It checked infection prevention and control arrangements because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.
Inspectors found the home was clean. Frequently touched areas were cleaned several times a day, hand sanitiser was available, and staff had PPE and training. Staff and residents had regular coronavirus testing and vaccinations.
The home arranged visitor appointments and provided a designated visiting area. People were also supported to keep in touch through electronic devices. Inspectors were assured that infection risks, admissions, testing, PPE and outbreaks were being managed.
The home was not given an overall quality rating or a Safe rating. This inspection only looked at infection prevention and control, so it does not provide a full view of the quality of care.
Clean environment
The home was clean and had extra cleaning schedules. Frequently touched surfaces were cleaned several times a day.
“The service was clean throughout, and there were procedures to ensure any infection control risks were minimised.” from the report
PPE and testing
Staff had PPE supplies and training. Staff and residents had regular coronavirus testing and had received vaccinations.
“All staff and people living at the service had regular testing for Covid-19, and all had received their vaccinations.” from the report
Maintaining contact
Visitors had booked appointments and a designated visiting area. People could also keep in touch with others using electronic devices.
“People were supported to maintain relationships and contact with others through electronic devices.” from the report
Supportive management
The registered manager was visible and supportive and sought advice from external agencies.
“The registered manager was visible and supportive to staff.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Are the cleaning schedules and cleaning of frequently touched areas still carried out as described in the report?
- 02How are visitors currently arranged, and what happens if infection risks increase?
- 03How are staff trained to use PPE correctly, and how is this checked?
- 04How are coronavirus or other infection outbreaks prevented and managed now?
- 05How are testing, vaccination and best-interest decisions recorded for people who cannot make their own decisions?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; the home was inspected but not rated and the other key questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 May 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.
Every inspection of The Dell
6 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2017Inadequatestayed InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- April 2017Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- January 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- March 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 March 2020.
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 Manchester
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. 89 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the home.”
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.