Timperley Care Home

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 10 February 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of assessment: 2 December 2025 to 14 January 2026.

The inspection was initiated in part due to a notification concerning the death of a person who had been at high risk of choking. As a result, we examined how choking risks were being managed within the service. We found people who were at risk of choking were identified and risk assessments were in place. Staff demonstrated an understanding of who required modified diets, however, there was evidence to suggest fluids were not always thickened as prescribed. Following this, the provider ensured additional training was provided to staff.

Timperley Care Home is a nursing care service providing accommodation, personal care, and treatment of disease, disorder and injury. On the first day of the inspection, the home was supporting 55 people.

Throughout the visit, we observed that the environment was clean, well maintained, and subject to regular monitoring. Infection prevention and control audits showed consistently high standards, and the home was described as spotlessly clean.

However, we identified concerns regarding the management of medicines. Although governance systems were in place to oversee medicines management, these processes had not identified the issues found during the inspection. Following feedback, the provider responded promptly, produced an action plan, corrected the areas of concern, and arranged additional staff training to strengthen safe practice.

Risks to people were assessed effectively, and staff were able to clearly describe how they mitigated these risks in day‑to‑day care. Further training was implemented to ensure staff were aware of how they should thicken fluids correctly to aid swallowing difficulties. Staff recruitment was carried out safely, and employees were supported with training and development relevant to their roles. People living at the home generally felt staffing levels were sufficient, though some staff members expressed the view that staffing could be improved.

Staff reported feeling listened to and supported by both the registered manager and deputy manager. They were able to raise concerns or provide feedback and felt their contributions were valued. The provider had implemented several employee recognition initiatives, including employee‑of‑the‑month, mental health support, and access to an employee assistance programme.

Governance audits of care records were effective in identifying areas for improvement, and these were addressed promptly.

The provider was found to be in breach of the regulation relating to safe care and treatment, as medicines were not consistently managed in a safe manner.