You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 1 December 2018

This inspection took place on 22 October 2018 and was unannounced.

Manor Field is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Manor Field is registered to accommodate six people with learning disabilities and autism. At the time of our inspection there were two people living in the home.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

At the last inspection in October 2017 this service was rated requires improvement. At this inspection, the service remains rated as requires improvement. Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions of safe, effective, responsive, and well led to at least good. They submitted this action plan with information about the improvements to be made, however, at this inspection on 22 October 2018, although some areas had improved there continued to be aspects of the service that required improving.

There was not sufficient oversight or record keeping for staff training. The systems in place did not accurately monitor and record what training staff had completed, when they had completed it, and when it was due for renewal. This resulted in several staff not being trained appropriately to meet people’s needs. When the management had recognised that one staff member had not completed a particular training course, prompt action was not taken to ensure they completed the required training.

People were not always supported by staff who were trained to meet their needs. We saw that staff were supporting individuals who may display challenging behaviour, and who required support from staff that were adequately trained to manage these risks. Staff members were not always trained in this area.

There was not a registered manager in post, but a manager was in place that would be going through the registration process with CQC. 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.

Staff had an understanding of abuse and the safeguarding procedures that should be followed to report abuse. People had risk assessments in place to cover any risks that were present within their lives, and actions were taken to reduce risk where possible. All the staff we spoke with were confident that any concerns they raised would be followed up appropriately by the manager.

Staffing levels were adequate to meet people's current needs, and rotas showed that staffing was consistent.

The staff recruitment procedures ensured that appropriate pre-employment checks were carried out to ensure only suitable staff worked at the service. References and security checks were carried out as required.

Staff supported people with the administration of medicines, and were trained to do so.

People were protected by the prevention and control of infection. The service was clean and tidy, and had a maintenance staff member regularly carry out any works required.

People's consent was gained before any care was provided and the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were met. Consent forms were signed and within people’s files.

People were able to choose the food and drink they wanted and staff supported people with this, and people could be supported

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 1 December 2018

The service was not always safe.

People were sometimes supported by staff were not always sufficiently trained to manage potential risks that were identified.

Staff were knowledgeable about protecting people from harm and abuse.

There were enough trained staff to support people with their needs.

Staff had been safely recruited within the service.

Medicines were managed safely.

People were protected from the spread of infection


Requires improvement

Updated 1 December 2018

The service was not always effective.

Staff did not always have the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care for people.

People could make choices about their food and drink and were provided with the support they required.

People had access to health care professionals to ensure they received effective care or treatment.

Consent was gained before carrying out any care.



Updated 1 December 2018

The service remains good.



Updated 1 December 2018

The service was responsive.

Staff had developed good relationships with people and were responsive to their needs.

People were supported to be as independent as they could be.

A complaints system was in place and was effective.


Requires improvement

Updated 1 December 2018

The service was not always well led.

There was a failure to implement systems to monitor staff training.

There was a lack of prompt action to rectify shortfalls that arose.

People knew the management team and were able to see them when required.

People were asked for, and gave, feedback which was acted on.

The service worked positively with outside agencies.