CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Old Rectory
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors found gaps in medicines records and environmental safety checks. Staffing, safeguarding and infection control arrangements were otherwise found to be safe.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the training and skills to support people. People's health, dietary and communication needs were assessed and reviewed, although some parts of the building were not fully dementia-friendly.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions and their preferences, cultural needs and communication styles were recognised.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and kept up to date. People had choice over daily life, could maintain relationships and were supported with activities and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers were visible and approachable, and staff understood their roles. The provider used feedback and lessons from concerns to plan improvements, although medicines and risk management still needed development.
What inspectors found, July 2023
The Old Rectory is rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but medicines records and some environmental safety checks needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 20 and 21 June 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff, managers and healthcare professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, audits and infection control arrangements.
The home was rated Good overall. Care was effective, caring, responsive and well-led. People described staff as kind and respectful. Staff understood people's needs, supported their health and promoted choice, independence and family contact.
Safe care was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found weaknesses in recording allergies, thickened fluids and some medicines instructions. Some floors and carpets needed repair, and the fire risk assessment was old. The provider made some immediate improvements and gave plans for further action.
Kind and respectful staff
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew people's preferences and supported their individual needs.
“Staff treated people with real kindness, respect, and humanity.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences and were regularly reviewed. People and relatives were involved in planning care.
“The provider regularly reviewed care plans and kept information about people's needs up to date.” from the report
Suitable staffing
Inspectors found that staffing levels and staff skills matched people's needs at the time of the inspection. Recruitment checks had also been completed.
“At the time of our inspection, staffing levels and skill mixes matched those required to meet people's needs and keep them safe.” from the report
Health and nutrition support
People were supported with a balanced diet and their health needs. Staff worked with healthcare professionals and acted on their advice.
“The provider ensured people were supported to maintain a balanced and varied diet which met their nutritional needs.” from the report
Allergy records
seriousAllergy information was not always recorded correctly, creating a risk that someone could receive a medicine they had previously reacted to. The provider said this had been corrected after the inspection.
“Information regarding people's allergies was not always recorded correctly on relevant documentation.” from the report
Building safety
seriousUneven floors and frayed carpets were potential trip hazards. The fire risk assessment had last been written in July 2016, although it had been reviewed.
“Some parts of the building were not suitably maintained or checked to make sure they were safe for people.” from the report
Dementia-friendly environment
needs fixingSome bedrooms did not have personal pictures or objects to help people living with dementia identify their room. Some areas also needed redecorating or refurbishing.
“Bedrooms did not always display pictures or objects relevant to the person, to help people living with dementia identify their own room.” from the report
- 01Have all allergy records been checked and corrected, and how is this now audited?
- 02How do staff record the level of thickener used each time someone receives thickened fluids?
- 03Have the uneven floors and frayed carpets been repaired, and has a new professional fire risk assessment been completed?
- 04What changes have been made to help people living with dementia recognise their bedrooms and use the home safely?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control; it was the first inspection under the new provider. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 July 2023 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 Old Rectory
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- July 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: InadequateCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 September 2022.
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 Wigan
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”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.