Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home

The Orchard Care Home

10 Papplewick Lane, Hucknall, Nottingham, NG15 7TJ

Goodpublished 6 November 2025, 9 months ago

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

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, August 2023

Rated Inadequate and placed in special measures; inspectors found serious risks involving medicines, consent, staff training and management.

This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 13 June 2023, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines, training information and management documents.

The home was rated Inadequate for Safe, Effective and Well-led. Inspectors found poor risk management, unsafe medicines processes, missing or unsuitable consent records, gaps in staff training and weak checks on the quality of care.

There were some positive findings. People and relatives said staff were caring and that people felt safe. Infection prevention, visits, food and drinks were also managed well in the areas checked. However, the overall rating changed from Requires Improvement to Inadequate because the provider had not made enough progress since the previous inspection.

What inspectors praised

  • Caring staff

    People and relatives told inspectors that staff were caring and kept people safe.

    “Staff always make me safe. They are good to me.” from the report

  • Infection prevention

    Inspectors were assured that infection prevention measures, personal protective equipment and visiting arrangements were being managed safely.

    “We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

  • Poor risk management

    serious

    Important risks were not properly assessed or monitored. Inspectors found water systems were not checked regularly, showers were too hot and some environmental risks had not been assessed.

    “Systems had not been established to assess, monitor and mitigate risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service.” from the report

  • Unsafe medicines practice

    serious

    A person was supported to chew medicines without evidence that a healthcare professional had confirmed this was safe. Guidance for medicines given when needed was also unavailable.

    “People were not always supported with their medicines in a safe way.” from the report

  • Consent and restrictions

    serious

    Mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions were often missing, incomplete or not specific to the decision. One legal authorisation to deprive a person of their liberty had expired.

    “The home was not working within the principles of the MCA.” from the report

  • Gaps in staff training

    serious

    Some staff, particularly at night, did not have training in medicines or people’s medical and wellbeing needs. Not all staff had completed learning disability or autism training.

    “The provider failed to ensure their staff received appropriate training.” from the report

  • Weak management checks

    serious

    Audits did not identify serious problems, incidents were not always recorded or investigated, and the provider had not acted sufficiently on earlier recommendations.

    “Audits were minimal and ineffective to assure safe care delivery and environmental safety.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What has been done to check and control water temperatures and other environmental risks, including the missing window restrictors?
  2. 02How are medicines now stored, administered and recorded, including medicines given when needed and any medicines that are chewed?
  3. 03Which people have current mental capacity assessments, best-interest decisions and valid legal authorisations where needed?
  4. 04What training has every staff member completed, especially night staff, in medicines, safeguarding, learning disabilities, autism and people’s health conditions?
  5. 05Who is currently responsible for managing the home, and how are audits and incident reviews now identifying and correcting problems?

This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their ratings were not given in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 August 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 The Orchard Care Home

4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Inadequate.

  1. August 2023Inadequatecurrent ratingdown from Requires improvement
    Safe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Inadequate

    Read what inspectors found at The Orchard Care Home →

  2. April 2022Requires improvementdown from Good
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

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

  3. February 2019Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. January 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. November 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. June 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. January 2011

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 January 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
Nearby

Other care homes near Nottingham

All in Nottinghamshire

Shortwood House

Nottingham, NG15 · 0.6 km
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 7 years agocare home