CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Balgowan Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm through risk assessments, safeguarding procedures, safe recruitment and environmental checks. Medicines were given by trained staff whose competence had been checked.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had appropriate training and supervision. People's food, drink, weight and healthcare needs were monitored, and staff followed the principles of consent and the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and visitors consistently described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw respectful interactions, with people's privacy, dignity, independence and involvement in decisions supported.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and changing circumstances. Activities, outings, communication support, family contact, complaints handling and end of life care were all addressed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team used audits, feedback, meetings and incident reviews to monitor and improve the service. Inspectors noted some negative feedback about how staff raised staffing issues, but said the impact on people's safety was minimal.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with minor concerns about how staffing issues were raised and meeting frequency.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 30 December 2019. One inspector spoke with people, visitors, staff and health professionals, observed care, looked around the home and reviewed care, medicine, staffing and management records.
The inspectors found that people were safe and received effective care. Medicines were managed safely, staffing levels and staff skills were reviewed, the home was clean and risks were assessed. People's nutritional, health and communication needs were recorded and supported.
People and visitors consistently described staff as kind, caring and welcoming. Care was based on people's preferences, with activities, outings and family contact supported. Complaints were investigated and the management team used audits, meetings and feedback to improve the service.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous overall rating was also Good, published on 25 May 2017.
Safe staffing
There was a registered nurse on each shift, supported by other care staff. Staffing levels and skills were reviewed when people's needs changed, including after falls or illness.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and visitors consistently praised staff for their kindness. Inspectors saw staff treating people respectfully and supporting their privacy, dignity and independence.
“Everyone we spoke to was consistent in their views that staff were very kind, caring and supportive.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, beliefs, communication needs and personal routines. Activities and outings were planned around people's interests.
“Staff were committed to delivering care in a person-centred way based on people's preferences and wishes.” from the report
Good health and nutrition support
Staff monitored people's weight and drinking, provided fortified food when needed and involved health professionals. People were supported to attend healthcare appointments.
“People's nutritional and health needs were consistently met with involvement from a variety of health and social care professionals.” from the report
Open management and improvement
The home used audits, complaints, surveys, meetings and incident reviews to identify and act on improvements. Staff said they felt supported by the management team.
“There were systems and processes to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided.” from the report
Raising staffing concerns
minorInspectors received negative feedback about the processes staff used to raise staffing issues. They said the impact on people's safety was minimal, but this is an area to ask the home about.
“We did receive negative feedback about the processes staff used to raise staffing issues and this has been reflected in the Well-Led Question as the impact on people's safety was minimal.” from the report
Frequency of meetings
minorOne visitor said they would like more meetings. The manager said the frequency of meetings was being discussed.
“I would like more meetings, they don't happen that often.” from the report
- 01How are staffing levels changed when there is sickness or when a person's health needs increase?
- 02How can staff and families raise concerns about staffing, and what happens after a concern is raised?
- 03How often are resident and relative meetings held, and what changes have been made from feedback?
- 04How will you involve my relative and our family in care plan reviews and medicine reviews?
- 05What activities and outings could be provided for my relative based on their interests and communication needs?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the premises and care provided; all five ratings were assessed as Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 January 2020 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, May 2017
Balgowan Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but staff training and supervision needed improvement.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 2 May 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, staff, relatives and healthcare professionals. They also checked care records, staff files, medicines, rotas, audits and policies.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable care plans and good support with health, food, activities and personal choices.
The main shortfall was staff development. Formal one-to-one supervision had not happened regularly, and some staff had not completed safeguarding or diabetes training. CQC made a recommendation for the home to improve this, but recorded no breach of regulations.
The home had been rated Good overall at the previous inspection in October 2014, with an Outstanding rating for Caring. At this inspection, Caring was rated Good.
Staffing and safety
Inspectors found enough staff to support people safely. Staff were present, calm and not rushed, with nurses allocated on each floor for each shift.
“We noted an air of calm in the home and staff were not rushed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff gave people attention, respected privacy and dignity, and supported people to keep their independence and make choices.
“We observed positive interactions between people and staff.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's needs, preferences, likes and dislikes. Staff knew people well and updated plans when circumstances changed.
“Each person had an up to date care plan which set out for staff how their needs should be met.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to take part in activities, outings and personal interests. Relatives were involved in care and decision-making.
“People were supported to go on holidays, eat out and outings to the places of their choice.” from the report
Management checks
The home used monthly audits and action plans covering areas such as medicines, care records, infection control and safety.
“They used these audits to review the service.” from the report
Training and supervision
needs fixingNot all staff had completed safeguarding and diabetes training, even though diabetes training was needed for four people. Formal one-to-one supervision had also not taken place regularly.
“We recommend that the registered manager seeks guidance to ensure that one to one supervisions and trainings are kept up to date as is necessary.” from the report
- 01What safeguarding and diabetes training has each relevant staff member completed since this inspection?
- 02How often do staff now receive formal one-to-one supervision, and how is this recorded?
- 03What has changed since the previous Outstanding rating for Caring?
- 04How are care plans reviewed when a person's needs or circumstances change?
- 05How do you use complaints, relatives' feedback and audits to make improvements?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 May 2017 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Balgowan Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.