Rated Care Homes

Finch Manor Nursing Home

RI

Requires improvement

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 9 ratings

    Its last inspection improved it from Inadequate to Requires improvement.

  • This month

    The latest rating was published.

  • 21 of 76

    rated care homes in Liverpool are rated Requires improvement, like this one.

Finch Manor Nursing Home: inspection record

Care home with nursing, 89 beds, Liverpool

Rated Requires improvement in October 2026, up from Inadequate.

Finch Manor Nursing Home: inspection record: inspection ratings by year, 2015 to 2026
201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
Overall
Safe
Effective
Caring
Responsive
Well-led

Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Christopher Grange Residential Care (Good, 0.6 miles away) and Mayfield Court (Outstanding, 0.6 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. –
    Paisley Court Not yet rated, 0.3 miles away
  2. G
  3. RI
    Christopher Grange Rhona House Requires improvement, 0.6 miles away
  4. O
    Mayfield Court Outstanding, 0.6 miles away
  5. RI
    Moss View Requires improvement, 0.7 miles away

See all care homes in Liverpool

See all care homes in West Derby

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 20 October 2026 (assessment visit 8 July 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of assessment: 25 August to 15 September 2026. Finch Manor Nursing Home is registered to provide personal and nursing care for up to 89 people. At the time of our assessment, 87 people were living at the service.

  • Safe No rating
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary

We undertook this assessment to follow up on breaches of regulation we found at our last assessment. The provider was previously in breach of legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding people from abuse and improper treatment, staffing, person‑centred care and good governance.

Improvements were found at this assessment; the provider was no longer in breach of safeguarding people from abuse and improper treatment, staffing and person‑centred care regulations. The provider remained in breach of safe care and treatment specifically in relation to medication management and good governance. We also found the provider in breach of the regulation need for consent.

Medication was not managed safely; clinical governance, processes and systems for medication management were in place but poorly followed and maintained. Audits had identified some of the issues we found but these had not been addressed. Governance systems relating to the oversight of medication management were not effective. Some of the medication concerns we found had been identified at our previous assessment but not addressed, and any improvements had not been sustained.

We found a small number of assessments where people lacked capacity to make specific decisions; we found some assessments and best interest decisions which were not appropriately completed and did not involve relevant professionals and relatives where appropriate. We requested the provider submit an action plan following the assessment.

People were supported by knowledgeable staff who understood their needs and promoted their health, wellbeing and independence. Incidents and safeguarding referrals had reduced; staffing levels were sufficient, and care plans and risk assessments provided guidance to support people effectively and safely. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect, and were encouraged to make choices about their daily lives. Staff knew people well and delivered personalised care. Staff spoke positively about the service and felt supported by the management team, contributing to a positive and well-led culture.

Improvements had been made to strengthen governance, safety, the quality of care provided and staff wellbeing.

Clinical governance arrangements had been reviewed and enhanced through the introduction of revised processes and frameworks, aimed at improving the quality of care and clinical outcomes for people.

Oversight systems had been implemented to ensure environmental risks were mostly identified, monitored, and addressed promptly, with historic actions reviewed and outstanding issues resolved. The environment was clean and the provider was in the process of a refurbishment and upgrade plan.

In instances where CQC has begun a process of regulatory action, we may publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded, if the action has been taken forward.

  1. Safe

    No rating

    Safe – this means we looked for evidence people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. The provider was previously in breach of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding people from abuse and improper treatment and staffing. Improvements were found at this assessment, the provider was no longer in breach of safeguarding people from abuse and improper treatment and staffing. We found a continued breach in relation to safe care and treatment, specifically in relation to medicines, some people’s medicines were not managed safely, this put people at risk, and ineffective medication governance was evidenced at this assessment. However, there was no evidence of poor outcomes or any harm to people.

  2. Effective

    Good

    Effective – this means we looked for evidence people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At our last assessment we rated this key question inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were good, and people and relatives feedback confirmed this.

  3. Caring

    Good

    Caring – this means we looked for evidence the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect.

  4. Responsive

    Good

    Responsive – this means we looked for evidence the provider met people’s needs.At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery. At the last assessment the provider was in breach of person-centred care. Improvements were found at this assessment, and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.

  5. Well-led

    No rating

    Well-led – this means we looked for evidence the service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment we rated this key question inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. At the last assessment the service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance. At this assessment we found the provider was in continued breach of good governance.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 20 October 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 20 October 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
  3. Ask how nursing cover works at night and at weekends.

Registration details

Registered manager
Jamie Wheeler
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service with nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Mental Health, Older People

Inspection report

Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

8 inspection reports, latest 4 April 2024. Latest assessment published 20 October 2026; the Care Quality Commission's newer assessments are published on its website rather than as reports.

The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.

Who runs it

Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
11143184 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Liverpool City Council

The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.

Checked on the council's website, November 2026.

Common questions

Does Finch Manor Nursing Home provide nursing care?
Yes. The Care Quality Commission lists Finch Manor Nursing Home as a care home with nursing.
How many beds does Finch Manor Nursing Home have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 89 beds at Finch Manor Nursing Home.
When was Finch Manor Nursing Home last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Finch Manor Nursing Home was published on 20 October 2026.
Who runs Finch Manor Nursing Home?
Finch Manor Nursing Home is run by Lotus Care (Finch Manor) Limited.
What is Finch Manor Nursing Home's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 20 October 2026.

Contact

Address
Finch Lea Drive, Liverpool, L14 9QN Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Christopher Grange Residential Care (Good, 0.6 miles away) and Mayfield Court (Outstanding, 0.6 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. –
    Paisley Court Not yet rated, 0.3 miles away
  2. G
  3. RI
    Christopher Grange Rhona House Requires improvement, 0.6 miles away
  4. O
    Mayfield Court Outstanding, 0.6 miles away
  5. RI
    Moss View Requires improvement, 0.7 miles away

See all care homes in Liverpool

See all care homes in West Derby