CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Bare Hall Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control systems were in place, including PPE, testing, cleaning, social distancing and safe admissions. They identified that agency staff had not received infection control training from their employer.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, but agency staff training on PPE needed strengthening.
Inspectors visited the home on 22 December 2020. This was an announced, targeted inspection because of coronavirus outbreaks. They looked only at infection prevention and control.
They found clean, homely surroundings, social distancing arrangements, regular testing and enough protective equipment. They were assured that the home had systems for preventing and managing infection, including safe admissions and up-to-date infection control guidance.
Agency staff said they had not received infection control training from their employer. The provider agreed to give them guidance on using PPE safely and to make sure they worked alongside contracted staff. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Clean surroundings
The home was clean and homely. Staff described frequent cleaning of areas that people often touch.
“People were cared for in a clean and homely environment.” from the report
PPE available
There was enough PPE, with storage and clinical waste bins positioned around the home.
“The service had an adequate supply of PPE equipment.” from the report
Testing and safer admissions
People and staff were tested regularly. New people took part in testing and followed quarantine arrangements when they moved in.
“Regular testing for all people and staff was ongoing by staff who had been trained on how to perform the testing.” from the report
Infection control systems
Inspectors were assured that the home had processes to prevent and manage infection outbreaks and that its infection control policy was current.
“We were assured that the provider's infection prevention and control policy was up to date.” from the report
Agency staff training
needs fixingAgency staff said they had not received infection prevention and control training from their employer. The provider agreed to give guidance on safe PPE use and have agency staff work alongside contracted staff.
“While contracted staff had received training on the prevention and control of infection, agency staff stated they had not received training from their employer.” from the report
- 01What infection prevention and control training have agency staff completed since this inspection?
- 02How do you check that agency staff can use PPE safely?
- 03Do agency staff still work alongside contracted staff as the provider agreed?
- 04How often are people and staff tested, and who carries out the testing?
- 05How are new residents tested and supported to quarantine when they move in?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus outbreak; it was inspected but not rated and did not assess the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 January 2021 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, November 2019
Bare Hall Residential Care Home was rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with effective management.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 22 October 2019. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, a relative, staff and healthcare professionals. The inspector also observed care, checked records, medicines, staffing, meals, infection control and the building.
People told inspectors they felt safe and that staff were available, kind and respectful. The home managed medicines, risks, staffing and infection control safely. Care plans were personalised, staff were trained and people received suitable food, healthcare and support to make choices.
People were supported to follow their interests and take part in activities. Their communication needs, privacy, dignity and end of life wishes were considered. The manager and provider used audits, reviews and feedback to monitor the quality of the home.
The overall rating was Good, and each of the five areas was rated Good. This was the same as the previous inspection, published on 3 June 2017.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe and staff responded quickly when they needed help.
“People told us staff were available when they needed them and they felt safe in their care.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, respect and compassion. Privacy, dignity and independence were supported.
“People were supported by caring and respectful staff.” from the report
Personalised care
Care files described people's individual needs, routines and preferences. Staff could explain how they supported each person.
“Care files were person-centred and individualised documents reflecting each person's assessment of needs.” from the report
Good activities and communication support
People had a range of activities and could use picture cards when they needed help to communicate or make choices.
“Picture card aids were available which could be used in most situations.” from the report
Quality was monitored
The provider carried out regular audits and used their findings to make improvements.
“The provider had systems in place to ensure the quality of service was regularly assessed and monitored.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and regularly review my relative's individual care needs and preferences?
- 02How will you make sure staff know about and follow my relative's risk assessments?
- 03What activities and communication support would be available for my relative?
- 04How would you support my relative's healthcare needs and contact healthcare professionals when needed?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in care plan reviews and decisions?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the premises and care provided, with all five CQC questions assessed; the provider was not asked to complete a provider information return beforehand. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 November 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.
Every inspection of Bare Hall Residential Care Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Bare Hall Residential Care Home →
- November 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Bare Hall Residential Care Home →
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 March 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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.