Laurel Court (Didsbury)

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 6 February 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of assessment: 14 October 2025 to 13 November 2025. This assessment was prompted in part following an incident where a person sustained significant bruising. This incident was investigated by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), and it was determined no regulatory action was required. Laurel Court (Didsbury) is a care home and is registered to provide accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care and the treatment of disease, disorder and injury for up to 91 people. The service was supporting 89 people at the time of the assessment. Further work was required to ensure that risks were consistently identified, assessed, and mitigated. The ongoing building work across the home had not been fully risk assessed, and this had posed risks to people. Staff required additional training to strengthen their understanding of contemporaneous documentation requirements and to enhance their confidence in using the electronic care planning system effectively. Medicines were not safely managed. Further work was required to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed and documentation was correctly completed. Governance audits to identify and improve where there were gaps in the safe management of medicines were not always effective. Staff required further guidance on the reporting and recording of accidents and incidents, as well as on monitoring when pain relief might be needed. Staff were recruited safely and were offered opportunities to progress in their roles. While staff felt able to raise concerns, these were not always communicated directly to the management team, highlighting an area where further encouragement and support could be provided. We observed that staff had a good understanding of people's needs and demonstrated kind and respectful interactions. They were able to describe how they supported individuals and promoted independence, which was commendable. To support continuous improvement, governance processes required strengthening to ensure they were robust and captured the right information to drive service development. The provider was in breach of the legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment. The provider did not fully assess where there were risks following a period of building work at the home. The management of medicines was unsafe and posed risks to people. There was a failure to use appropriate equipment to move and handle 1 person safely. The provider was in breach of the legal regulation in relation to good governance. Governance processes were not robust and were not capturing where there were gaps in recording and care planning. Governance processes had not identified the gaps in staff training when using the electronic care planning system or in the safe management of medicines. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.