CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Trentham House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured that the home was following safe infection prevention and control procedures. This included safe admissions, effective use of protective equipment, testing, cleaning and an up-to-date policy.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were safe.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 November 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control because the home was being used for people discharged from hospital with a positive Covid-19 status.
Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infections, using personal protective equipment safely, supporting testing, and following shielding and social distancing rules. They also found that the infection prevention and control policy was up to date.
The home had separate arrangements for the designated top floor. Staff worked only on that floor, laundry was kept separate, and domestic staff hours were increased so cleaning and sanitising took place seven days a week.
The service was inspected but not rated. This was not a full inspection of the quality of care, and the report does not give an overall rating.
Separate infection control area
The top floor had been adapted with infection control systems so the home could safely care for people who had tested positive for Covid-19 in hospital.
“The provider had adapted the top floor of the service and implemented safe infection control systems in line with current guidance.” from the report
Dedicated staff arrangements
Staff working on the top floor did not work in other health or social care services, reducing the risk of infections spreading between settings.
“Staff were deployed to work solely on the top floor of the service.” from the report
Separate laundry
A separate laundry facility was used on the top floor to reduce the risk of infection spreading through clothing and bedding.
“A separate laundry facility had been created on the top floor to ensure people's clothing and bedding would be laundered separately” from the report
Regular cleaning
The home increased domestic staff hours so cleaning and sanitising could take place every day of the week.
“The provider had increased the hours the domestic staff worked to ensure regular cleaning and sanitising of the environment took place seven days a week.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Are the infection prevention and control arrangements described in this report still in place?
- 02How are staff prevented from working across the home and other health or social care services when infection risks are high?
- 03How would you safely admit someone who has tested positive for Covid-19 or another infection?
- 04How often are communal areas, bedrooms and equipment cleaned and sanitised?
- 05How do you support staff to keep up to date with infection control guidance and training?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not assess the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 November 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.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Trentham House Care Home was rated Good overall, but Safe Requires Improvement because medicines were not always managed in line with guidance.
This was the home’s first inspection. It was unannounced and took place on 22 and 23 October 2019. Inspectors spoke with 11 people, four relatives and seven staff. They also reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good for Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and were treated kindly and with dignity. Inspectors found that staff knew people well, care plans contained useful information, people had choices about daily life, and activities and meals were available.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found weaknesses in medicine guidance, records for pain relief patches and checks on homely remedies. The report says this meant there was limited assurance about safety and an increased risk that people could be harmed. The home’s manager said immediate action would be taken.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw respectful interactions and staff supporting people's dignity.
“People were supported by a staff team that knew them well and were kind and caring.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs, preferences and communication requirements. Staff could explain people's likes, dislikes and risks.
“People's care plans provided staff with information to support people effectively and detailed people's preferences.” from the report
Choice and activities
People could choose where to spend time, whether to join activities and whether to have time alone with visitors. A range of activities was available.
“People had access to a variety of activities and could take part or observe should they wish to.” from the report
Good management oversight
The manager used audits and a monthly action plan to identify and address problems. The home also worked with health and social care professionals.
“The registered manager had developed an action plan which was reviewed monthly.” from the report
Medicine records and guidance
seriousMedicine instructions were not detailed enough, and records for pain relief patches did not show they were being applied safely. The home could not show that homely remedies had been checked by a GP for each person.
“People did not always receive their medication in line with recommended guidelines.” from the report
End of life wishes
needs fixingPeople had end of life plans, but their advance wishes had not been recorded consistently. The inspector recommended that the provider seek guidance on this.
“However, people's advance wishes in respect of their care during their end of life had not been consistently gained.” from the report
Equality and diversity records
minorEquality and diversity plans were in place, but the records inspected were basic and lacked detail. The manager said this would be addressed.
“People had equality and diversity plans in place, although records we saw were basic and did not go into detail.” from the report
- 01What immediate action was taken after inspectors found weaknesses in medicine protocols and records?
- 02How do you now record and check the application of pain relief skin patches?
- 03Have homely remedies for each resident been checked by their GP, and how is this recorded?
- 04How do you make sure each resident's advance wishes about end of life care are discussed and recorded?
- 05What changes have been made to staffing arrangements, including the availability of permanent staff?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering all five CQC questions, as well as the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 November 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.
Every inspection of Trentham House Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2019GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 November 2018.
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 Stoke-on-Trent
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 £1,190 a week. 93 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“She's shown compassion, patience and a level of understanding that no other carer has given.”
“She maintained a great environment for mum both with the tidiness and cleanliness of the house and Mum and with her caring and understanding attitude.”
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.