Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Affinity Trust

Pear Tree Lane

198A Cannock Road, Wednesfield, Wolverhampton, WV10 8PT

Goodpublished 14 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. Inspectors found enough staff and good systems for risk management, infection control and medicines, but some prescribed creams were initially accessible in bedrooms.
Effective?
Good
This key question was not assessed in this focused inspection.
Caring?
Good
This key question was not assessed in this focused inspection.
Responsive?
Good
This key question was not assessed in this focused inspection.
Well-led?
Good
Inspectors found a positive and open culture, clear management arrangements, regular checks and action when concerns were identified. The process for obtaining feedback from relatives needed improvement.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2023

Pear Tree Lane was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring support, but identified issues with cream storage and relatives' feedback.

This was an unannounced focused inspection on 23 November 2023. Inspectors looked only at Safe and Well-led. They visited outside standard working hours, met all 13 residents, spoke with four relatives and seven staff, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and quality records.

The home was rated Good for Safe and Good for Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, support for people's choices, infection control, and systems for managing risks and learning from incidents. People could receive visitors without restrictions.

There were some shortfalls. Prescribed creams were found unsecured in bedrooms, although staff moved them to secure storage immediately. The relatives' survey could not show feedback for this home alone. The provider was given two recommendations to improve these areas.

The overall rating remains Good, as it was at the previous inspection published in June 2018. This inspection did not reassess the other three key questions.

What inspectors praised

  • Risk management

    Risks were assessed and managed so people could take part in activities they enjoyed. Emergency plans and health condition plans were in place.

    “Safety risks were assessed and managed in a way that enabled people to participate in the activities they enjoyed.” from the report

  • Safe staffing

    Staffing rotas showed that agreed safe staffing levels were consistently met. Permanent staff had also been safely recruited.

    “Staff rotas showed that agreed safe staffing levels were consistently met and staffing numbers increased at times to enable people to safely access the community in line with their care plans.” from the report

  • Infection control

    Inspectors found safe infection prevention and control practices, including effective use of protective equipment.

    “People were protected from the risk of infection as staff followed safe infection prevention and control practices.” from the report

  • Open leadership

    The home had a positive and open culture. Managers used audits, care reviews and incident learning to improve care.

    “There was a positive and open culture at the service.” from the report

  • Choice and visitors

    People were supported to make choices in the least restrictive way possible. Visitors could come without restrictions.

    “People were able to receive visitors without restrictions in line with best practice guidance.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

  • Prescribed cream storage

    needs fixing

    Some prescribed creams were accessible in bedrooms. Staff moved them to secure storage immediately, and the provider was asked to improve staff compliance.

    “However, we found some prescribed creams were accessible in people's bedrooms.” from the report

  • Relatives' feedback

    minor

    The relatives' survey covered several services, so its results could not be separated to show feedback about this home. The provider was asked to review the process.

    “Feedback from the relatives' survey could not be broken down to the specific location of Pear Tree Lane as it covered feedback from a number of the provider's other registered services.” from the report

  • Agency staff use

    minor

    Some relatives were concerned about increased use of agency staff. Managers said this had increased because of staff sickness, while inspectors found safe staffing levels were met.

    “Staffing has changed, it does not help having a lot of agency staff, there is more than there has ever been” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How do you now check that all prescribed creams are stored securely?
  2. 02How will you collect and report feedback specifically about this home rather than combining it with other services?
  3. 03How many agency staff are currently being used, and how do you make sure they know each person's care plan and preferences?
  4. 04What were the previous ratings for Caring, Effective and Responsive, which were not assessed in this inspection?
  5. 05How are relatives involved in reviewing and improving person-centred care?

This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; Caring, Effective and Responsive were not assessed and their previous ratings carry over. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 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 Pear Tree Lane

2 rated inspections over 5 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 Pear Tree Lane →

  2. June 2018Good
    Safe: GoodWell-led: Good

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

  3. March 2017

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 March 2017.

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 Affinity Trust

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

Fairmount

Hastings, TN35
Good
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home

The Views

Rye, TN31
Good
Residential
Rated 6 years agocare home

The Willows

Bexhill-on-Sea, TN40
Good
Residential
Rated 23 months agocare home
Nearby

Other care homes near Wolverhampton

All in Wolverhampton

Newcross Care Home

Wolverhampton, WV11 · 1.4 km
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 7 years agocare home

Waterside House

Wolverhampton, WV11 · 1.5 km
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 6 years agocare home