CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Barton Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Barton Lodge was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection-control arrangements but also identified weaknesses that were addressed.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 February 2021. It looked at how the home was prepared to prevent and control coronavirus infections. Seven people were living there at the time.
Inspectors found strong arrangements for visitors, testing, PPE supplies, staff training and keeping in touch with families. They also found that staff and visitors were using a kitchen food-preparation sink for handwashing after care tasks, PPE was stored in a food pantry, and cleaning records were not detailed or checked enough.
The home acted immediately or shortly after the inspection to address these points. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not provide an overall quality rating or ratings for most areas of care.
Visitor infection controls
The home had procedures intended to reduce the risk of visitors catching or spreading infection. Routine visiting was suspended in line with government guidance at the time.
“Robust procedures were in place to prevent visitors to the home from catching or spreading infection.” from the report
Family contact
People were supported to stay in contact with friends and family by phone and video calls while routine visiting was suspended.
“People were supported to maintain contact with their friends and families using video and phone calls.” from the report
PPE training and supplies
Staff had training in infection prevention and PPE use. Inspectors saw PPE being used in line with best practice, and sufficient supplies were available.
“Staff had completed training in infection prevention and control and the correct use of PPE.” from the report
Testing and policies
People and staff took part in regular whole-home testing. The home had updated coronavirus policies and followed national guidance when people tested positive.
“People and staff took part in regular COVID-19 'whole home' testing.” from the report
PPE storage
needs fixingPPE was not always stored appropriately. Some was kept in a food pantry, although the home said this was corrected after the inspection.
“However, we saw that PPE was not always being stored appropriately.” from the report
Cleaning records
needs fixingThe home was clean and hygienic, but its cleaning schedules did not contain enough detail and were not audited sufficiently. More detailed schedules were introduced after the inspection.
“However, whilst cleaning schedules were in place, these were not sufficiently detailed or audited.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure staff and visitors use the correct handwashing facilities after care tasks?
- 02Where is PPE stored now, and how do managers check that it remains stored safely?
- 03Can you show how detailed cleaning schedules are completed and audited?
- 04Who is the infection control lead, and how do they monitor infection prevention practice?
- 05How are people supported to keep in contact with family when routine visiting is restricted?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 March 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, March 2020
Rated Requires Improvement, with an Inadequate well-led rating; inspectors found kind care but serious problems with medicines, staff training and management oversight.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 4 and 6 February 2020. The inspector spoke with all nine people living there, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, staff files, training records and management systems.
Some improvements had been made since the previous inspection. Risk assessments were better, night and weekend staffing had improved, and people were supported to make choices. However, medicines were not always given or recorded safely. Staff training was incomplete, parts of the building were unsafe or unsuitable, and activities were limited.
The overall rating remained Requires Improvement. Caring was rated Good, but Safe, Effective and Responsive remained Requires Improvement. Well-led fell to Inadequate because checks and management systems had not found or fixed important problems, and the provider remained in breach of several regulations.
People's choices
People were supported to make decisions about daily life and could refuse parts of their planned care. Staff asked for consent before care tasks.
“People were supported to make as many decisions as possible about their daily living.” from the report
Food and nutrition
People were involved in menu planning, had drinks available and were supported with dietary needs. Care plans recorded food preferences and nutrition monitoring was used where needed.
“Staff were aware of any specific dietary requirements for people, for example, if people needed their food to be pureed to minimise the risk of choking.” from the report
Healthcare links
The home contacted healthcare professionals appropriately and acted on their advice. Inspectors found positive working relationships with outside professionals.
“A healthcare professional told us they had a good working relationship with the service.” from the report
Staffing levels
Weekend staffing had increased since the previous inspection. People, relatives and staff told inspectors there were enough staff to meet people's needs on the inspection day.
“People, relatives and staff all told us there were enough staff on duty to meet their needs and we judged this to be the case on the day of the inspection.” from the report
Medicines
seriousMedicines were sometimes given in the wrong amount, missed, or recorded unclearly. Staff had not received medicines training for four years, so records did not show reliably that people received medicines as prescribed.
“At this inspection we found people did not always receive their medicines safely or as prescribed.” from the report
Staff training
seriousMany staff had not completed important training, including medicines, safeguarding, dementia care, diabetes and the Mental Capacity Act. Some newer staff had no evidence of induction training.
“Training records showed the majority of staff training had not been completed.” from the report
Unsafe or unsuitable environment
seriousThe main stairway carpet had holes and was a trip hazard. Bathroom access was difficult for some people, there were no showers, and the building was not sufficiently adapted for people with dementia.
“However, we found the main stairway carpet to be unsafe.” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingThere were long periods with little or no interaction or activity. The activities coordinator was away, no cover had been arranged, and the displayed activities list was three months out of date.
“During our two-day visit. The registered manager had no arrangements in place for another staff to carry out this task.” from the report
Infection control and cleanliness
needs fixingThe home was generally clean, but some rooms had an odour. Many staff had not completed food hygiene or infection control training.
“At this inspection we found the service generally clean however, some rooms had an odour.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to medicines administration and records since the inspection, and how are these now audited?
- 02Which staff have completed medicines, safeguarding, dementia, diabetes and infection control training?
- 03Has the damaged stairway carpet been replaced, and what changes have been made to bathroom access and shower facilities?
- 04What arrangements are in place for activities when the activities coordinator is unavailable?
- 05What action was taken in response to the Regulation 12 Warning Notice and the other breaches?
This was an unannounced planned inspection of the overall quality of the care and the premises, with all five CQC questions rated; it followed the previous Requires Improvement rating published in February 2019. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 March 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.
Every inspection of Barton Lodge
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- February 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 July 2015.
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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.