CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Old Vicarage
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, January 2024
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care, but some quality records and staff meeting arrangements were not clear.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 29 and 30 November 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, staff and visiting professionals. They reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, safety records, audits and other documents.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. People said they felt safe, staff understood their needs, staffing levels were suitable, medicines were managed safely and the home was clean. Staff were trained to recognise and report safeguarding concerns.
Inspectors found a positive culture and good links with health and social care professionals. However, it was not clear how feedback and audit findings were recorded or followed up. People and staff also gave mixed accounts of meetings.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only. The overall rating stayed Good because the other ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection were carried forward.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff knew how to recognise and report safeguarding concerns.
“People told us they felt safe living at The Old Vicarage.” from the report
Suitable staffing
Inspectors found enough staff were deployed to meet people's needs and keep them safe. Recruitment checks were completed for new staff.
“Enough staff were deployed to keep people safe and meet their needs.” from the report
Safe medicines and clean environment
Medicines were given as prescribed and stored safely. Inspectors also found effective cleaning and infection control arrangements.
“Medicines were managed safely. People received their medicines on time and as prescribed.” from the report
Positive culture
People and staff spoke positively about the home. The home worked with health and social care professionals and had systems to monitor quality.
“There was a positive and open culture at the home, with systems and processes in place to ensure good outcomes for people.” from the report
Quality actions were not clearly tracked
needs fixingInspectors could not see clearly where issues or feedback from audits, meetings and surveys were recorded, or what action followed. They also said the improvement plan focused mainly on business-related matters.
“It was not clear where issues or feedback from audits, meetings and surveys was documented, and what actions had been taken to drive improvements.” from the report
Mixed accounts of meetings
minorPeople could not recall attending meetings or having their views sought, although records of two resident meetings and a survey were available. Staff also gave different accounts of how often staff meetings took place.
“Staff provided mixed feedback regarding meetings. Some stated these occurred monthly, others said they did not occur at all.” from the report
Accident records could give better oversight
minorAccidents were recorded, but inspectors discussed the benefit of using one overall log to make patterns and trends easier to identify.
“We discussed with the provider the benefit of using an overarching log to document all accidents and incidents, which would help with oversight and in identifying patters and trends more easily.” from the report
- 01How do you now record actions from audits, surveys and meetings, and how do you check that those actions are completed?
- 02How often are staff meetings held, and how are staff who cannot attend kept informed?
- 03How are residents' views gathered if they do not attend formal meetings?
- 04How do you use the accident and incident records to identify patterns and prevent further falls or accidents?
- 05What has changed since the previous inspection, when Well-led was rated Outstanding?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other key question ratings were carried forward from the last comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 January 2024 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, August 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection-control practice during a targeted COVID-19 review.
Inspectors visited the home on 7 August 2020. The visit was announced and focused only on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
They were assured that the home had measures for visitors, shielding, social distancing, safe admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, hygiene and its infection-control policy.
Staff used pictures of themselves without protective equipment on their uniforms. This helped people recognise who they were speaking to. The home also provided extra strength and balance training to help reduce falls and hospital admissions.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or a rated score for the five key questions.
Protective equipment
Inspectors were assured that staff were using protective equipment effectively and safely.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Helping people recognise staff
Staff wore pictures of themselves without protective equipment so people could recognise them when protective equipment covered their faces.
“Each staff member wore a picture of themselves on their uniform without PPE, so people knew who they were talking with.” from the report
Falls prevention
The home increased strength and balance training during lockdown. This was intended to reduce falls and hospital admissions.
“Increased strength and balance training was provided for people during the lockdown to help reduce falls and to reduce hospital admissions.” from the report
Infection-control arrangements
Inspectors were assured about the home's arrangements for visitors, admissions, testing, social distancing, hygiene and its infection-control policy.
“We were assured that the provider was meeting shielding and social distancing rules.” from the report
Further development identified
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach. The report does not explain exactly what needed improving.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What infection-control changes have been made since the August 2020 inspection?
- 02How are visitors currently prevented from catching or spreading infections?
- 03How are people and staff currently tested for infections?
- 04How does the home make sure protective equipment is used effectively and safely?
- 05What resources was the provider signposted to, and what changes were made as a result?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection and no ratings were awarded. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 August 2020 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 Vicarage
3 rated inspections over 9 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2024Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 December 2010.
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 Bolton
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. 10 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.