CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Barclay Gardens
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines management, clean premises and systems for monitoring risks, falls and incidents.
- Effective?
- Outstanding
- Inspectors found exceptionally effective care and strong working relationships with healthcare professionals. These had helped improve fluid intake, oral health, infection prevention and hospital transfers.
- Caring?
- Good
- People described staff as kind, patient and respectful. Staff involved people in decisions, respected privacy and dignity, and supported independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, wishes and interests. People were supported with communication, activities, relationships, complaints and end-of-life planning.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive, person-centred culture and managers who monitored quality and sought improvements. Staff felt supported and involved in developing the service.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Barclay Gardens was rated Good overall, with Outstanding results for people's health and care outcomes.
This was an unannounced inspection on 05 September 2019. Inspectors spoke with 12 people, four relatives, 10 staff and two visiting healthcare professionals. They also reviewed care plans, medicine records, recruitment and training files, and other management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness and dignity, given personalised care, and supported by a positive management culture. Medicines, staffing, cleanliness and risk management were found to be safe.
Effective was rated Outstanding, improving from Good at the previous inspection. Inspectors found strong joint working with health professionals had improved health outcomes, including fluid intake, oral health and hospital transfers. Overall, Good means the home met the relevant standards, while Outstanding for Effective means outcomes were consistently better than expected compared with similar services.
Strong healthcare links
The home worked closely with healthcare professionals. Inspectors linked this partnership to better health outcomes and fewer hospital admissions.
“People's health needs were met because of outstanding working relationships between the registered manager and other health professionals.” from the report
Safe care
Inspectors found systems to manage risks, enough staff to meet people's needs and safe handling of medicines, including time-sensitive medicines.
“People were supported by enough staff to safely meet their needs.” from the report
Positive leadership
The home had a friendly and relaxed atmosphere. Managers and staff shared a focus on person-centred care and continuous improvement.
“Staff and management had a shared value of wanting to deliver the best care possible to the people who lived at the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you now monitor people's fluid intake, and what happens if someone is not drinking enough?
- 02How are time-sensitive medicines and 'as needed' medicines reviewed and recorded?
- 03How do you work with GPs, nurses and other healthcare professionals when a person's health changes?
- 04How will you support my relative's communication needs, including large print, pictures or other formats if needed?
- 05How are residents and families involved in care plans, activities and end-of-life decisions?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions; the previous overall rating was Good and Effective improved from Good to Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 October 2019 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, October 2016
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with only minor concerns about staffing and gardening activities.
This was an unannounced inspection on 1 September 2016. One inspector and an expert by experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicine records, staff files, complaints, accidents, rotas and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall and received Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff during the visit, safe recruitment, appropriate medicine systems, trained staff and support for people's health and nutrition.
People were described as treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They were involved in care decisions, their care plans were reviewed, and they had access to activities and community facilities. Complaints were investigated and used to make improvements.
Since the previous inspection in May 2015, the provider had taken appropriate action to improve incident reporting and assessments of people's ability to make decisions. The report says the required action on the Mental Capacity Act had also been completed.
Safe care
Staff understood how to recognise abuse and manage risks. Accidents and incidents were reviewed, with action taken to reduce future risks.
“Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored and evidence of investigations were in place where appropriate.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff respected privacy, supported choice and encouraged independence.
“People were shown compassion and kindness by staff that provided their support.” from the report
Personalised support
People and relatives were involved in care planning. Staff understood individual needs, preferences and ways of communicating.
“People received personalised care that responded to their needs and preferences.” from the report
Good management
The manager encouraged people, relatives and staff to share concerns and ideas. Quality checks were used to identify and act on improvements.
“The registered manager had effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and deliver improvements to the care and support people received.” from the report
Medicines and health
People received their medicines as prescribed. Records, storage and checks were in place, and people could access health professionals when needed.
“Medicines were stored appropriately and there were systems in place to manage medicine safely.” from the report
Gardening activity
minorOne person said they had not been able to access gardening. The home had plans to start a gardening group, but it was not yet available at the inspection.
“One person told us they loved gardening but had not had access to this.” from the report
Staffing on the floor
minorOne relative sometimes felt there was only one staff member on the floor and that staff also had to do laundry. Inspectors observed enough staff during the visit and rated Safe Good.
“Sometimes there is only one [member of staff] on the floor and they have to put the laundry away someone else could do that they have enough to do” from the report
- 01How many staff are usually working on each unit at different times of day, and who covers laundry and other non-care tasks?
- 02Has the gardening group started, and what activities are available for people who enjoy gardening?
- 03How are care plans reviewed each month, and how are relatives involved when someone cannot make decisions about their care?
- 04How are medicine errors investigated and prevented from happening again?
- 05How can families raise a complaint, and how will they be told what action has been taken?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions and the overall quality of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 October 2016 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 Barclay Gardens
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- October 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 November 2010.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Telford and Wrekin
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 £1,200 a week. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.