CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Thorncliffe Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe, there were enough staff, recruitment checks were completed and medicines and infection control were managed safely. Inspectors found an unlocked denture cleaning product in an en-suite bathroom, and the manager said this was an oversight and discussed it with staff.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs, choices, nutrition and fluid intake were assessed and monitored. Staff received training and supervision, and the home worked with health professionals. Some people wanted more variety in the menu.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with dignity and respect, and staff supported independence and personal choices. One person said the quality of care could vary between staff.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised, activities were offered and people could maintain relationships and receive visitors. Relatives reported continuing problems with missing or stained laundry.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Governance systems, audits, meetings and surveys helped the manager oversee the service. Staff described management as approachable and supportive, and the manager promoted learning when issues were found.
What inspectors found, October 2022
Thorncliffe Residential Care Home is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with some concerns about laundry, menu variety and one unlocked cleaning product.
This was the first comprehensive inspection under the new provider. It took place unannounced on 31 August and 1 September 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, reviewed care and medicines records, checked staff files, toured the building and observed care and medicines administration.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines systems, suitable infection control and systems to manage risks. People were supported with their choices, nutrition, healthcare, personal care and activities.
Inspectors also found some matters needing attention. Relatives reported that clothes sometimes went missing or were returned stained. People wanted more variety in the menu. One person said the quality of care could vary between staff. An unlocked denture cleaning product was found in an en-suite bathroom, but the manager acted on this during and after the inspection.
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw that recruitment checks were completed before employment.
“Staff were recruited safely. There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Choice and control
People were supported to make choices about their routines, care and daily lives. Records showed that care was delivered in the least restrictive way possible.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests” from the report
Respect and independence
Inspectors saw staff offering reassurance and spending time with people. Care plans recorded personal preferences and supported independence.
“Staff recognised the importance of maintaining people's dignity and respect.” from the report
Activities and relationships
Activities were taking place, including games, exercises, trips and visits from a hairdresser. People were able to maintain relationships with family and friends.
“Activities were being offered. During our inspection, we observed activities taking place and a hairdresser was attending the service in line with daily activities schedule.” from the report
Laundry problems
needs fixingSeveral relatives said clothes were sometimes missing or stained. The manager gave assurances about improving laundry identification and management.
“I do most of [person's] washing as most of their clothes go missing.” from the report
Limited menu variety
minorPeople said they had enough food and drinks but wanted more vegetables and greater variety in the menu.
“It isn't bad, but I would like more vegetables” from the report
Variation in care
minorMost feedback about staff was positive, but one person said the quality of care could vary between staff. Inspectors told the manager about this for ongoing monitoring.
“One person told us that the quality of care could vary between staff.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to stop residents' clothes going missing or being returned stained?
- 02How are residents involved in choosing meals, and what changes have been made to provide more vegetables and menu variety?
- 03How do you check that the quality of care is consistent between different staff members?
- 04How are denture cleaning products and other potentially harmful items kept safely away from residents?
This was the first comprehensive inspection under the new provider and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control; a December 2021 focused inspection had reviewed Safe and Well-led only. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 October 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, December 2021
Thorncliffe Residential Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, clean and well-managed care, but night staffing views were mixed.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 10 November 2021. Inspectors looked at Safe and Well-led only because concerns had been raised about staffing, agency use, care, training, infection control, cleanliness, slings and management. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and outside professionals, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
People generally said they felt safe and were positive about the home. Inspectors found the home clean, with safe medicines systems, suitable personal slings, risk assessments and staff safeguarding training. Infection control measures, including testing and protective equipment, were in place.
The home was rated Good overall, with Safe and Well-led also rated Good. Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used in the overall result. The last inspection, published in December 2018, had also rated the service Good.
People felt safe
People overwhelmingly said they felt safe living in the home. Staff had safeguarding training and understood what to do if they had concerns.
“People overwhelmingly told us they felt safe living in the home and gave us extremely positive feedback on the service.” from the report
Clean and well prepared
Inspectors found the home clean and without unpleasant smells. Staff and visitors were using protective equipment correctly, and testing and vaccination arrangements were in place.
“We found the home to be clean and tidy, with no unpleasant smells.” from the report
Safe medicines and equipment
Medicines were stored, given and recorded safely. People who needed a sling had their own sling, marked with their name.
“Medicines were stored and managed safely. Staff who were required to administer medicines had all received training and had their competency assessed periodically.” from the report
Strong management checks
The management team used audits and action plans to monitor quality and address shortfalls. Staff said they could raise concerns and felt supported.
“The registered manager had effective systems and processes to monitor the standard and quality of the service.” from the report
Family involvement
Relatives could use an electronic system to see information about care, medicines, food, fluids and activities. The home also sent monthly newsletters.
“The electronic system used to sign in and out of the home, asked questions of visitors when they were signing out.” from the report
Night staffing
needs fixingPeople and staff gave mixed views about whether two staff at night were enough for 28 residents. The provider said it had advertised for more night staff and planned to increase the number to three.
“Personally I think they need more night staff. I don't think two staff at night-time is enough for 28 residents” from the report
- 01Has the planned increase from two to three night staff happened, and is this now the usual night staffing level?
- 02How do you check that staffing levels are enough when several residents need help at the same time?
- 03How will you make sure my relative's medicines are given at the right time and recorded correctly?
- 04How will relatives be kept informed about care, medicines, activities and any changes in needs?
- 05How do you use incidents, accidents and complaints to make improvements?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were used in calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 December 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 Thorncliffe Residential Care Home
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Thorncliffe Residential Care Home →
- December 2021GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Thorncliffe Residential Care Home →
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 August 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 Blackburn with Darwen
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. 91 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
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.