Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a nursing home

What the CQC found at The Manor House

Goodpublished 1 March 2019, 7 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were safe. They found effective use of PPE, testing, cleaning, hygiene and outbreak planning.
Effective?
Good
This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
Caring?
Good
This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
Responsive?
Good
This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
Well-led?
Good
This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, February 2021

Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and safe arrangements during the COVID-19 restrictions.

This was an announced, targeted inspection on 29 December 2020. It looked at infection prevention and control because of the COVID-19 outbreak response. The home was caring for 37 people and could support up to 50.

Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment correctly, carried out testing, followed shielding and distancing rules, and kept the home clean. They also found up-to-date infection control policies, suitable visitor procedures and plans for managing an outbreak.

The home was inspected but not rated overall. The Safe question was also inspected but not rated. The other areas of care were not assessed in this inspection.

What inspectors praised
  • Protective equipment

    Staff, managers and visitors were using PPE correctly. The home had clear procedures for using and disposing of it.

    “We noted good practices in all of the areas we considered including the use of and disposal of personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
  • Infection control

    The home had regular testing, hand sanitiser, PPE, reminders about handwashing and plans for isolating areas if infection spread.

    “There were comprehensive measures to prevent infections spreading within the home.” from the report
  • Visitor arrangements

    The home had procedures for approved visitors and communicated the rules to people and relatives. It also supported contact through social media and video messaging.

    “Visiting rules and process were communicated effectively to people using the service and their relatives.” from the report
  • Staff preparation

    Staff had COVID-19 training and the home had plans to maintain safeguards if there was a staff shortage.

    “Staff had comprehensive knowledge of good practice guidance and had attended Covid-19 specialist training.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What are the current rules for visiting, and how have they changed since the inspection?
  2. 02How often are people living in the home and staff tested now?
  3. 03How would the home isolate people and organise staff if there were an infection outbreak?
  4. 04How will the home support contact with relatives if in-person visits are restricted?
  5. 05What are the home's current ratings for Caring, Effective, Responsive and Well-led?

This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under Safe; the other questions and an overall rating were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 February 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.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, March 2019

The Manor House is rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, but some recruitment checks were not documented before staff started.

The inspection was unannounced and took place over two days. Inspectors reviewed care records, medicines, staff recruitment and training records, and the home's quality checks. They also spoke with people, relatives, staff and visiting health professionals.

All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines support, clean surroundings, up-to-date care records and care that respected people's choices and dignity.

There were some areas to improve. In three of five staff files, some recruitment checks had not been recorded before those staff started work. Checks of the environment had also missed several safety issues, although these were fixed during the inspection. Not all weekend and night spot checks were documented.

What inspectors praised
  • Enough staff

    Inspectors saw a good staff presence and found rotas showed there were enough staff to support people.

    “Staffing rotas supported that there were enough staff available to manage and support people's needs.” from the report
  • Kind and respectful care

    People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff knew people's histories, preferences and the best ways to support them.

    “During the inspection we saw that staff, the registered manager, deputy and provider's representative treated people with dignity and respect and provided compassionate support.” from the report
  • Activities and personal care

    The home offered varied activities, including exercise, outings, games and entertainers. Staff also spent time talking and reading with people.

    “Activities included days out, parties for 'celebration days', exercise sessions, ball games, board games, hand massages and manicures, coffee mornings and visiting entertainers such as singers.” from the report
  • End of life support

    The home had plans for people's end of life wishes and involved relatives where appropriate. Healthcare professionals were particularly positive about this support.

    “The service has a particular expertise in dealing with people's end of life care.” from the report
  • Quality monitoring

    Senior staff carried out regular audits covering areas such as medicines, care plans, incidents, infection control and cleaning. The report says remedial action was taken when needed.

    “We reviewed audits and outcomes and saw audits were up to date and that remedial actions were taken with staff when necessary to ensure that care was provided in the right way.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Recruitment records

    needs fixing

    Three of the five staff files checked did not show all relevant recruitment checks before staff started. The manager said some checks had been completed but not documented, and inspectors recommended revising the process.

    “Recruitment systems and processes were in place but in three of the five files we considered, insufficient recruitment checks had been made prior to the members of staff starting work.” from the report
  • Environmental safety checks

    needs fixing

    Inspectors found an oxygen cylinder stored incorrectly, a medicinal gel that other people could access and an ineffective bedrail. These issues were addressed during the inspection, but existing checks had not found them.

    “A variety of environmental risk assessments and checks had taken place but these had not picked up on the issues seen at the inspection.” from the report
  • Mental capacity training

    needs fixing

    Not all staff had received up-to-date formal training on the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. A new training programme and revised induction were being arranged.

    “We noted that not all staff had received up to date formal training on Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).” from the report
  • Spot-check records

    minor

    The home carried out unannounced checks during night shifts and weekends, but not all were recorded. The provider's representative said records would be kept and actions reviewed.

    “Not all of these checks were being documented and the provider's representative said that they would ensure that a record was kept of this and that any remedial action that was noted would be reviewed and acted upon.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How do you now make sure every required recruitment check is completed and recorded before a new staff member starts?
  2. 02What extra environmental safety checks were introduced after the oxygen cylinder, medicinal gel and bedrail issues were found?
  3. 03Have all staff now completed up-to-date training on the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards?
  4. 04How are night-time and weekend spot checks recorded, and how do you track any action needed?
  5. 05How would you support my relative's communication needs, activities and end of life wishes?

This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating, using records, observations and discussions with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 March 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of The Manor House

2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent rating
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read what inspectors found at The Manor House →

  2. March 2019Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at The Manor House →

  3. September 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. July 2014

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 July 2014.

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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire

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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.

“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
Simon W., about Ncebakazi V.
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
Jackie S., about Tracy O.
See live-in carers near LancashireProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.