You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

We have not inspected this service yet

Inspection summaries and ratings from previous provider

Overall summary & rating


Updated 13 September 2018

This inspection took place on 22 and 23 August 2018. It was an unannounced visit to the service.

We previously inspected the service on the 12, 13 July and 2 August 2017. The service was rated Requires Improvement at the time. We found people were not always receiving their medicines in line with good practice. At the time of our last inspection the provider was working with the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) pharmacist to make improvements to the storage and administration of medicines. We have been monitoring the service to ensure improvements were made to the key questions, Safe and Well-Led. At this inspection we found improvements had been made.

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

People living in the care home occupied either one or two bedroomed apartments. Accommodation was spread over three floors. A range of communal seating areas were available. People could choose to have a meal in a restaurant, bistro area or in their apartment. The first floor had an activities and library area. The second floor had a unit called ‘The Willows’, which provided support to people living with dementia.

The care home could provide nursing and care support up to 85 older adults, at the time of our inspection 76 people lived at the home.

The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, 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.

We received positive feedback from people, their relatives and staff on how the service was led. Comments included, “Very well run and have a great ability, endless patience,” “Splendid, seems to work very efficiently” and “Excellent, proactive, concerned about the residents in their care.”

People told us they were supported by staff who were kind and caring. People said “Sweet natured, so good, they put up with so much. Even the cleaners have time for you” and “All staff are so obliging, friendly, kind and compassionate.”

People told us staff treated them with dignity and respect and they were encouraged to be as independent as they could be. Comments from people included, “Staff are very good, very respectful and “Oh yes, we are treated very respectfully.”

The provider had processes in place to undertake pre-employment checks on staff to ensure they were suitable to work with people. People told us there were enough staff to provide them with safe care. We observed call bells were answered in a timely manner.

Staff were aware of the need to report any incidents and accidents. Trends in accidents were monitored and lessons learnt when things went wrong were shared within the home and across the provider’s locations.

People were supported by staff that had developed a good working relationship with them. Staff were aware of people’s likes and dislikes.

People were supported to engage in meaningful activities and keep in contact with family and friends. People were provided with lots of opportunities to visit places of interest in the local area and further away, for example, trips to the seaside, Hyde Park and National Trust properties.

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

Inspection areas



Updated 13 September 2018

The service was safe.

People were protected from harm because staff received training to be able to identify and report abuse. There were procedures in place for staff to follow in the event of any abuse happening.

People�s likelihood of experiencing injury or harm was reduced because risk assessments had been written to identify areas of potential risk.



Updated 13 September 2018

The service was effective.

People were encouraged to make decisions about their care and day to day lives. Decisions made on behalf of people who lacked capacity were made in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People were cared for by staff who were aware of their roles and responsibilities.



Updated 13 September 2018

The service was caring.

Staff were knowledgeable about the people they were supporting and aware of their personal preferences.

People were treated with dignity and respect.



Updated 13 September 2018

The service was responsive.

People were able to identify someone they could speak with if they had any concerns. There were procedures for making compliments and complaints about the service.

People were supported to attend meaningful activities, both within their accommodation and the local community.



Updated 13 September 2018

The service was well-led.

The service had robust processes in place to monitor the quality of care provided.

There was a clear management structure in place and people told us the management team were approachable.