Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Salutem Bid Co

Meade Close

1-2 Meade Close, Urmston, Manchester, M41 5BL

Requires improvementpublished 26 February 2026, 6 months ago

Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2023

Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind care, but leadership and person-centred care needed improvement.

This was a focused inspection after concerns about leadership, safeguarding, medicines, staffing, and the safety of equipment and premises. Inspectors visited the home, spoke with a person, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.

The home was rated Good for Safe and Effective. There were enough staff at the time of the inspection. People received kind care, medicines were generally managed safely, the home was clean, and staff understood safeguarding. However, some care records were not accurate or up to date, and thickener added to drinks was not always recorded.

The home was rated Requires Improvement for Well-led. Leadership and staffing arrangements were changing, and this affected the consistency and quality of care. The overall rating remained Good because the other two questions were not inspected at this visit and their previous ratings were carried forward.

What inspectors praised
  • Enough staff at inspection

    Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs during the visit. The home had processes for managing sickness and was recruiting additional senior staff.

    There were enough staff to meet people's needs at the time of the inspection.from the report
  • Kind and respectful care

    People received compassionate support, and inspectors saw warm, respectful interactions between staff and people. Staff protected privacy and dignity.

    People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.from the report
  • Safe medicines systems

    Medicines were administered by competent staff, recorded appropriately and checked. Information went with people when they moved between care settings.

    The home ensured people received their medicines as prescribed. Medicines were recorded appropriately, and stock monitored and checked regularly.from the report
  • Clean and adapted home

    The home was clean and hygienic, with adaptations to support people's physical needs. People could personalise their rooms.

    The service gave people care and support in a safe and clean environment that had been adapted to meet their physical needs.from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Care records were incomplete

    needs fixing

    Staff were not always keeping care records accurate, complete and up to date. The home had an action plan to address this.

    Staff were not always keeping accurate, complete and up-to-date records.from the report
  • Personalised support needed more work

    needs fixing

    Care plans did not always focus clearly enough on people's independence, strengths, goals and aspirations. Not all staff had completed Positive Behaviour Support training.

    Care plans needed to focus more on promoting people's independence, their strengths and to reflect their goals and aspirations more clearly.from the report
  • Leadership was still in transition

    needs fixing

    The management and senior staff team was being restructured. Inspectors said this had affected the quality and consistency of care, although people were not at risk of harm.

    These changes were still in transition and needed to be fully established and sustained.from the report
  • Thickener was not always recorded

    needs fixing

    Staff did not always record when thickener powder was added to drinks for people at risk of choking. The manager took immediate action.

    Staff were not always recording when thickener powder was added to drinks for people who were at risk of choking.from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What has changed in the management and senior staff team since the inspection, and how are you checking that these changes are now established?
  2. 02How do you make sure every person's care plan reflects their independence, strengths, goals and aspirations?
  3. 03Have all staff now completed Positive Behaviour Support training, and how is their competence checked?
  4. 04How do you check that care records are accurate, complete and up to date?
  5. 05How do you ensure staff record thickener added to drinks for people at risk of choking?

This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 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 Meade Close

3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

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

    Read what inspectors found at Meade Close

  2. May 2023Good
    Safe: Requires improvementWell-led: Good

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

  3. February 2022Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. March 2019Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. April 2018

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 April 2018.

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.

Same provider

Other services run by Salutem LD BidCo IV Limited

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

Belvoir Lodge

Nottingham, NG5
Good
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home

Birchwood

Chesham, HP5
Outstanding
Residential
Rated 6 months agocare home

Edward Street

Widnes, WA8
Good
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home

Ewer Court

Colchester, CO2
Good
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home
Nearby

Other care homes near Manchester

Urmston Manor

Manchester, M41 · 0.3 km
Outstanding
ResidentialDementia
Rated 7 years agocare home