• Care Home
  • Care home

Cambridge Manor Care Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

33 Milton Road, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, CB4 1UZ (01223) 363904

Provided and run by:
Rockley Dene Homes Limited

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 12 February 2021

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC's response to the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 28 January 2021 and was announced. This was because we were not responding to concerns and wanted to ensure we minimised the burden on the service as much as possible.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 12 February 2021

Cambridge Manor is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Cambridge Manor accommodates up to 88 people in one adapted building over three floors. The ground floor cared for people that require residential and some nursing needs. The first floor care for people who were living with dementia. The top floor is for people who require nursing care.

We inspected the home on 14 November 2017. The inspection was unannounced. There were 82 people living in the service on the day of our inspection.

The home had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with CQC to manage the service. Like registered providers (‘the provider’) they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

In November 2015 we conducted a first comprehensive inspection of the home. We rated the service as ‘good’. At this inspection we found the service remained ‘good’.

There were sufficient staff to keep people safe and meet their care and support needs. Staff worked well together in a mutually supportive way and communicated effectively. Training and supervision systems were in place to provide staff with the knowledge and skills they required to meet people’s needs effectively.

Good infection control procedures were in place. Staff understood their responsibility in ensuring the home was clean and were using the correct equipment.

There was a friendly, relaxed atmosphere and staff were kind and attentive in their approach. People were provided with food and drink of good quality that met their individual needs and preferences.

People’s medicines were managed safely and staff worked closely with local healthcare services to ensure people had access to any specialist support they required. Systems were in place to ensure effective infection prevention and control.

Staff supported people to make everyday decisions in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff respected people's privacy and dignity and encouraged people to be as independent as they could be.

People’s individual risk assessments were reviewed and updated to take account of changes in their needs. Staff knew how to recognise and report any concerns to keep people safe from harm. There was evidence of organisational learning from significant incidents and events. Any concerns or complaints were handled effectively.

People were supported to have maximum choice of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

Arrangements were in place to ensure the quality of the service provided for people was regularly monitored. We found that people who lived at the service and their visitors/relatives were encouraged to share their views and give feedback about the quality of the care and support provided.