Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a nursing home, run by Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust

Cambeck Close

Cambeck Close, Manchester, M45 8NF

Goodpublished 30 December 2023, 2 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the service performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm, and there were enough staff for the respite stays being offered. Inspectors recommended improvements to medicines guidance and noted that controlled drug records were not always signed by two staff.
Effective?
Good
Staff had the training and support needed, and people's health, nutrition and communication needs were assessed. Some repairs were slow and the building looked tired in places.
Caring?
Good
People received kind and compassionate care. Staff respected privacy, dignity, culture and personal choices, although inspectors asked the manager to consider age-appropriate language for one person.
Responsive?
Good
Care was personalised and families were contacted before stays about any changes in needs. However, some formal reviews were overdue, and staffing problems limited opportunities to go out.
Well-led?
Good
There was a positive culture, clear management structure and quality monitoring. Some care plans had not been reviewed within a year, but the service had identified this and was arranging the reviews.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2023

Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, but staffing limited outings and some records and reviews were overdue.

Inspectors visited on 15 and 20 November 2023. They spoke with people using the service, relatives, staff and professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines, recruitment, complaints and quality records.

The home provides overnight short breaks for children and adults with learning disabilities and complex healthcare needs. Inspectors found enough staff for the stays being offered, safe recruitment, suitable training, kind care and good communication with families and professionals.

There were some shortcomings. Staffing problems meant people could not often go out, some care reviews were overdue, and medicines guidance and records did not always match best practice. The building looked tired in places, although some actions were started during the inspection.

The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The overall rating stayed Good compared with the previous inspection. The Responsive rating fell from Outstanding to Good.

What inspectors praised

  • Kind and respectful care

    Inspectors saw positive interactions. Staff understood people's individual needs and respected their privacy, dignity and choices.

    “People received kind and compassionate care. Staff respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report

  • Good preparation for stays

    Staff contacted families before respite stays to check for changes in needs or medicines. Care plans and risk assessments were updated when needed.

    “Staff contacted families before each respite stay to discuss any changes in people's needs.” from the report

  • Safe staffing and training

    There were enough staff for the respite stays being offered. Staff were safely recruited and received training for people's specific needs.

    “There were enough staff to meet people's care and support needs and support people to take part in inhouse activities of their choice.” from the report

  • Good partnership working

    Families and professionals reported good communication. The home worked with schools, day centres and health and social care professionals.

    “The staff team worked in partnership with families and a range of professionals, including schools and local authority social workers.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

  • Medicines procedures

    needs fixing

    One medicine was being given differently from the prescriber's instructions without the agreement being recorded in the medicines file at the time. The home also did not always follow its policy requiring two staff signatures for controlled medicines.

    “We recommend the service follows best practice guidelines for having prescriber agreement on file for any changes in how medicines are administered” from the report

  • Limited outings

    needs fixing

    Recruitment problems meant people could not often go out during their respite stay. The home had reduced the number of respite nights it offered.

    “However, it was not always possible to support people to go out during their respite stay due to problems in recruiting additional staff.” from the report

  • Overdue care reviews

    needs fixing

    Some formal reviews with families and some care plan reviews had not happened within the expected timescale. The home was arranging the overdue reviews.

    “However, some care plans had not been reviewed within a year.” from the report

  • Slow repairs and tired décor

    minor

    Some repairs took a long time because they were handled through the provider's estates department. The internet problem was fixed during the second inspection visit, and a decorator had been booked.

    “The building looked tired in places, and repairs were not always completed in a timely way.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How many staff will be on duty during my relative's stay, and how will you decide whether they can go out?
  2. 02How do you check that medicines are given exactly as prescribed and that any changes have written prescriber approval?
  3. 03When was my relative's care plan last reviewed, and when will the next family review take place?
  4. 04Which repairs or decoration work remain outstanding, and when are they expected to be completed?
  5. 05How will staff support my relative's communication needs, including allowing enough time to respond?

This was a comprehensive inspection covering the premises and care across all five key questions; the previous overall rating was Good, while the previous Responsive rating was Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 December 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Cambeck Close

2 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. December 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Cambeck Close →

  2. December 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. March 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. April 2011

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 April 2011.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.

Another option

Or stay at home with a private carer

Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.

About live-in careHow PrimeCarers works
Same provider

Other services run by Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust

1 other service on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.

Nearby

Other care homes near Manchester

All in Bury

Hamilton Rest Home

Manchester, M45 · 1.1 km
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 6 years agocare home