- Care home
Mayfield Care Home
Assessment report published 22 October 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
The service is a residential care home located in Trafford, Greater Manchester. There were 14 people using the service at the time of the assessment.The service supports older people and people living with dementia. The home is also able to meet the needs of people with mental health needs, sensory impairment and physical disabilities.
We carried out this assessment on 6 and 8 October 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.
People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found that staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions. They had choice, control and freedom over their lives.
People were supported by enough staff who had the skills and knowledge to support them safely. Risks were assessed and people were involved in the process. The home was safe. This included effective systems in medicines administration, safeguarding people from abuse and maintaining a safe environment.
All prospective residents had a face-to-face assessment to ensure people’s needs could be met. People’s nutritional and hydration needs were met. The home employed chefs who cooked fresh food and home cooked meals. People were supported to manage their dietary needs and associated risks. This included where people were at risk of poor nutrition, dehydration and other medical conditions that affected their health. People's health and wellbeing was routinely monitored, and people were supported to achieve good outcomes. People’s rights and decisions around consent were understood and respected by staff.
People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff retention was very good, and people were supported by staff who knew them well. Staff were not rushed and had sufficient time to develop trusting relationships with people, and their families. Care plans included details of people’s day-to-day needs and preferences including details about people’s hobbies, interests and important relationships.
Care plans were person centred and were reviewed regularly to ensure they fully reflected people’s physical, mental, emotional and social needs. The management team were hands on, visible and available to people and their families. The open-door policy enabled issues to be dealt with quickly and informally. Staff received training in a range of courses designed to support their understanding of people’s rights. These included dignity in care, safeguarding and dementia awareness.
Staff and leaders demonstrated a positive, compassionate, listening culture that promoted trust and understanding between them and people using the service. Staff had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality care, treatment, and support. Staff felt involved in the service and told us managers encouraged staff to speak up with ideas for improvement. Staff reported a high level of satisfaction with their roles. They told us, “I love it here, it is like a home, I like to be here. It is like a family. The manager is accessible and we all work together” and “It’s great here. It is a small home, so I know the residents well. It is homely.”
People's experience of this service
People told us they had a positive experience of living at Mayfield care home. People felt safe, comfortable and well cared for. During our visits, the atmosphere across the home was calm, welcoming and relaxed. People were settled and at ease in communal areas, and those who preferred quieter spaces were supported to spend time in their rooms.
All the people we spoke with were positive about the staff and the care they received. One person told us, “It is lovely here, I really enjoy it. Staff are nice. Staff are kind. I feel safe living here and I like the gardens and sit outside with family.” Another person said, “Yes, I feel safe. Yes, they treat me with dignity and respect.” Relatives spoke positively about the care provided and told us the communication was very good. One relative told us, “The communication and continuity of staff is really good. We have peace of mind. We have confidence with the staff. They always update us when needed.”
We carried out observations of care and saw staff interacting with people in a respectful, compassionate and unhurried way. Staff explained what they were doing, offered reassurance and used clear verbal prompts when supporting people with mobility. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people less able to talk with us. The interactions observed were positive and staff had the time to engage with people in a meaningful way.
Mealtimes were well organised and responsive to people’s needs. People were offered choice and alternatives, and food looked fresh and appealing. Staff checked preferences, offered drinks regularly and supported people at their own pace. People were happy with the food. One person told us, “If I don’t like the food choices, they offer something different. Tea and snacks twice a day. I have put weight on here.”
People were supported to take part in activities that interested them. During the visits, some people were engaged in creative activities such as colouring and staff supported some people to have their nails done. Staff had enough time to spend time with people.
Throughout the day, people were supported in a way that respected their privacy, dignity and independence. Call bells were answered in a timely way, and staff were attentive to people’s comfort and personal care needs. People had a positive experience of care, supported by kind staff who knew them well and responded to their needs in a compassionate and person‑centred way.