CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Manor House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Staff understood safeguarding and risk management, recruitment checks were in place, and people received medicines as prescribed. One environmental risk was missed by the home's checks but was addressed during the inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had thorough assessments and regular reviews. Staff were trained and supported, and people received help with nutrition, healthcare and developing independence.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions, and staff supported their independence, communication and lifestyle choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and reflected people's routines, communication needs, goals and preferences. People had access to activities, education, work, holidays and community opportunities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team promoted an open culture and involved people, relatives and staff. Quality systems were in place, although one environmental risk had not been identified before the inspection.
What inspectors found, May 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with one environmental risk identified and fixed during the visit.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 11 and 12 April 2019. One inspector reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files, training, complaints, incidents and quality checks. They spoke with people living in the home, a relative, staff and the registered manager.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. People were supported to make choices, build skills and become more independent. Inspectors found that medicines, staffing, safeguarding, nutrition and access to healthcare were managed well.
People were involved in their care and could take part in activities, education, work, holidays and community life. The home was larger than current best practice guidance for this type of service, but inspectors said the effect on people was reduced because the relevant principles were followed.
The previous inspection, published in October 2016, also rated the home Good. Inspectors found one area of environmental risk that the home's checks had missed, but the manager dealt with it during the inspection.
Safe care and medicines
Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse, manage risks and support people during distress. Medicines were given as prescribed by trained staff.
“People received their medicines as prescribed from trained staff.” from the report
Building independence
The home focused on helping people gain skills and make their own choices. People were supported with shopping, meals, travel, education, work and activities.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors found that staff treated people with dignity and respect and understood how to communicate with them. People were involved in decisions about their support.
“Staff treated people with kindness and respect.” from the report
Personalised lives
People's care reflected their routines, interests, communication needs and goals. They could choose activities, holidays and how they spent their time.
“People were supported to live their lives the way they wanted.” from the report
Community involvement
The home had developed links with local groups, charities, projects and public services. People took part in volunteering and community activities.
“Excellent community links had been developed despite the locations rural setting” from the report
Environmental checks
needs fixingThe home's quality checks had not identified one area of environmental risk. The manager addressed this during the inspection.
“However, checks of the environment had not identified one area of risk.” from the report
Size of the home
minorThe home was registered for up to 18 people and 16 people were living there during the inspection. Inspectors said this was larger than current best practice guidance, although they found the relevant principles were being followed.
“This is larger than current best practice guidance.” from the report
- 01What environmental risk was identified during the inspection, and how do you now check that it remains safe?
- 02How would you support my relative to develop skills and become more independent?
- 03How do you involve people in reviewing their care and making decisions about their support?
- 04What activities, education, work or community opportunities would be available for my relative?
- 05How would you communicate with my relative and support their individual communication needs?
This was an unannounced inspection of the care, premises and management of the home, covering all five CQC questions; inspectors reviewed two care records and three medication administration records. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 May 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, October 2016
The Manor House is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with strong support for independence and community life.
This was an unannounced inspection on 2 and 5 September 2016. The inspectors spoke with 10 people living at the home, six staff and a health care professional. They also observed care, checked five care files, medicines records, staff files and other records, and toured the home and bungalows.
The inspectors found that people were safe and supported by enough suitably checked staff. Medicines were handled safely. Staff had relevant training, people received food and health care suited to their needs, and people were involved in decisions about their care.
People were described as being treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They were supported to stay independent, take part in activities, use local facilities and have roles in running the home. The manager had systems for listening to people, handling complaints and checking the quality of care.
The home received a Good rating in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection in April 2013 found the service compliant with the regulations inspected at that time.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff had medicine training, and medicine processes were checked by the home and the supplying pharmacy.
“People's medicines were handled, stored and administered safely by staff who had received training.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff received regular essential training, specialist training and support to gain further qualifications. Their competence was checked during induction and probation.
“Staff were provided with specialist training on specific subjects relevant to the need of the people who used the service” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were observed being warm and encouraging. They respected people's privacy, dignity and right to choose whether to join activities.
“We saw staff were kind and caring when supporting people.” from the report
Independence and meaningful lives
People were supported to use local facilities, take part in activities and develop daily living skills. They also had roles that matched their strengths and interests.
“All of the people who used the service were actively involved in the running of the service and undertook roles which emphasised their skills and strengths.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What is the current outcome of the three applications for authorisation mentioned in the report, and have any further applications been made?
- 02How will you make sure staffing remains sufficient and that people are supported by staff they know and get on with?
- 03How are each person's care plan, risk assessments, activities and responsibilities reviewed when their needs or wishes change?
- 04How are medicines audits completed, and what happens if an error or missed dose is found?
- 05How can my relative and family give feedback or make a complaint, and how will we be told what action was taken?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service covering all five CQC questions, with the previous inspection having taken place in April 2013. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 October 2016 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 Manor House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 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
32 live-in carers within about an hour of North Lincolnshire
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 £1,300 a week. 29 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
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.