CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Bartholamew Lodge Nursing Home Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm, and risks, staffing, medicines and infection control were generally managed safely. Inspectors found that some as-needed medicines were not always reviewed or recorded fully.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received care from trained and supported staff. Their health, nutrition and hydration needs were assessed and staff worked with health professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with compassion, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions and encouraged to remain independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and communication requirements. People could take part in activities, although staff and people said they would like more activities in the community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff had confidence in the management. Audits, meetings and feedback systems were used to monitor quality and identify improvements.
What inspectors found, June 2019
Bartholamew Lodge Nursing Home Limited was rated Good; inspectors found caring, person-centred support, with some recording and staffing concerns.
This was an unannounced, planned comprehensive inspection on 20 May 2019. Inspectors reviewed records, spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, and observed care.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were treated with kindness and dignity, and received care based on their needs and preferences.
The home had enough staff according to its staffing tool, and medicines, risks, safeguarding and infection control were generally managed safely. However, some as-needed medicines were not always reviewed or fully recorded, and some people and relatives said staff could be busy or slow to respond at times.
The rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published in 2016. No enforcement action was required.
Kind and respectful care
People were supported by staff who were caring, compassionate and respectful. Inspectors found that staff knew people's histories and preferences.
“People were supported by staff that were caring, compassionate and treated with dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected individual needs, preferences and communication requirements. People were encouraged to make choices and remain independent.
“People received person centred care and support based on their individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff had relevant training, supervision and support. Inspectors found they understood their roles and felt confident in providing care.
“People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs.” from the report
Good management
The management team was approachable and used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor the service and plan improvements.
“Audits were completed by staff and the registered manager to check the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
Safe care planning
Risk assessments gave staff clear instructions, and records showed that planned checks and care were carried out.
“The risk assessments were detailed and included actions for staff to take to keep people safe and reduce the risks of harm.” from the report
As-needed medicine records
needs fixingWhen as-needed medicines had been given regularly for more than 14 days, reviews were not always completed. Staff also did not always record why each dose was given.
“when PRN medication had been regularly given for more than 14 days this had not always been reviewed and staff were not recording the reason each time PRN was administered.” from the report
Response times when staff were busy
needs fixingSome people and relatives said staff were too busy at times, including one report of a call taking more than 10 minutes to receive a response. Inspectors observed timely responses during their visit.
“I was struggling to look after [Name], I pressed the buzzer and it took over 10 minutes for them [staff] to come” from the report
Staff turnover
minorSeven staff had left during the previous 12 months. The home planned to introduce exit interviews to understand why staff were leaving and identify patterns.
“A number of staff members have left the home, due to having to travel long distances or realising that care is not for them.” from the report
Community activities
minorPeople and staff said they would like more activities outside the home. Management said it was exploring a dedicated minibus.
“People and staff members told us they would like to do more activities within the community.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure every as-needed medicine dose has a reason recorded and is reviewed when it is used regularly?
- 02How do you monitor call-bell response times when staff are busy?
- 03How many staff have left since the inspection, and what have exit interviews shown?
- 04What activities are currently available outside the home, and has access to a dedicated minibus been arranged?
- 05How are care plans reviewed with residents and relatives when needs or preferences change?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including both the care provided and the care home premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 June 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 Bartholamew Lodge Nursing Home Limited
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Bartholamew Lodge Nursing Home Limited →
- June 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 December 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 Sandwell
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 £950 to £1,190 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
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.