CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Barrington Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Barrington Lodge was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, effective care but safety checks and management systems were not reliable enough.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 15 March 2022. They spoke with people, a relative and staff, observed care and reviewed care and staff records and management records. They also took account of information from the local authority.
The home was rated Good for Effective, Caring and Responsive. People had good relationships with staff, received food and drink that met their needs, had personalised care plans and were supported to keep in touch with people who mattered to them.
Safe and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found problems with recruitment checks, pressure mattress settings, medicine temperature checks, fluid records, PPE use and procedures for responding to a heart attack. The home's audits had failed to identify these issues.
The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection. The provider was required to send an action plan, and CQC said it would monitor progress and take further action if needed.
Kind and respectful staff
People had good relationships with staff. Staff supported people warmly, respected privacy and encouraged independence.
“Staff were kind and caring and engaged with humour and warmth.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's health needs, backgrounds, preferences and routines. Staff knew people well and kept plans up to date.
“People's care plans were person-centred.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People received food of their choice, suitable portions and snacks and drinks outside mealtimes. Staff supported people to see the healthcare professionals they needed.
“Portion sizes were good and people were offered seconds.” from the report
Staff support and training
Staff received training and regular supervision. They were supported with topics including dementia, medicines and moving and handling.
“Staff told us they felt very supported by the registered manager and deputy manager.” from the report
Activities and relationships
Daily activities were available, including support for people who spent much of their time in their rooms. Staff helped people maintain contact with those important to them.
“There is always something going on.” from the report
Recruitment checks
needs fixingThe provider did not always obtain two references or fully check gaps in employment history as required by its own policy. Other checks, including criminal records and identity checks, were completed.
“The provider did not always ensure two references were obtained in line with their recruitment policy.” from the report
Pressure ulcer prevention
seriousSome pressure mattresses were not set correctly for people's weights, increasing the risk of pressure ulcers. The manager introduced a system to improve this during the inspection.
“Pressure mattresses were not always at the right settings in line with people's weights to reduce the risk of pressure ulcers.” from the report
Emergency response
seriousSome care workers said they would call a nurse rather than start resuscitation when a person did not have a do-not-resuscitate order. This could delay vital treatment.
“This could delay the person receiving vital resuscitation.” from the report
Infection control details
needs fixingOne staff member was not wearing a mask at the start of the inspection. Some bed bumpers were cracked and needed replacing because they would be difficult to clean properly.
“We were not always assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
- 01What action has been completed to make sure every new staff member has two references and a full employment history?
- 02How are you now checking pressure mattress settings against each person's weight, and who reviews those checks?
- 03How do you check medicine storage temperatures and the accuracy of fluid records?
- 04What training and checks now make sure staff respond immediately and correctly if someone has a heart attack?
- 05How have your audits changed so they identify problems with recruitment, PPE, records and care before they put people at risk?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control; the previous overall rating and all five question ratings were reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 May 2022 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, September 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found mostly good infection control, but PPE was not always used correctly.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 9 August 2021. It followed concerns about infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic. The home cared for 40 people, with space for up to 44.
Inspectors found that visitors were tested or asked for evidence of a recent negative test, visits took place in a suitable ventilated room, and people were supported to keep in touch with family and professionals. The home also had testing and isolation arrangements for new admissions.
Most infection control arrangements were found to be in place. However, two staff members were not always wearing suitable personal protective equipment. The manager dealt with this immediately. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a formal Good, Requires Improvement or Inadequate rating.
Visitor infection controls
The home used testing and suitable visiting arrangements to reduce the risk of infection while still allowing visits.
“The provider was following best practice guidance to prevent visitors to the home spreading COVID-19 infections.” from the report
Family contact supported
People were supported to stay in contact with important people through visits, telephone calls and video calls.
“The provider also supported people to keep in touch with those who were important to them through visits, phone and video calls.” from the report
Safe admissions
The home had an admissions process involving COVID-19 testing and periods of isolation.
“The provider had an admissions process in place which followed best practice in relation to COVID-19 which included COVID-19 testing and periods of isolation.” from the report
Extra support during the pandemic
Extra staff were used during the pandemic to provide additional support, including more activities in the home.
“The provider used extra staff during the pandemic to provide extra support to people, such as increased activities within the home.” from the report
PPE was not always suitable
needs fixingInspectors saw two staff members who were not always wearing suitable PPE. The manager responded immediately when this was raised.
“However, two staff members were not always wearing suitable PPE and the registered manager responded to this when we raised our concerns.” from the report
- 01What action was taken after inspectors saw two staff members not always wearing suitable PPE?
- 02How do you now check that staff wear the correct PPE consistently?
- 03How are visits managed now, including testing and use of suitable rooms?
- 04What testing and isolation arrangements are used when someone is admitted?
- 05How are people supported to keep in touch with family if visiting arrangements change?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only, and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 September 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.
Every inspection of Barrington Lodge
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Requires improvement.
- May 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015Goodup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 October 2012.
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 Croydon
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 £1,230 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.