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.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control procedures were being followed. They found arrangements for screening visitors, testing people and staff, using PPE, isolating people and managing possible outbreaks.
- 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, September 2020
Barton Lodge: inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors visited on 25 August 2020. This was an announced, targeted inspection focused on infection prevention and control in response to the coronavirus pandemic.
They found good practice in visitor screening, testing, isolation arrangements, social distancing, cleaning and the use of personal protective equipment. The home was COVID-19 free at the time of the inspection.
The inspectors were assured that the home was following safe infection prevention and control procedures. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Visitor safety
Visitors were screened before entering, visits were by appointment, and time was allowed between visits for cleaning.
“Visitors were screened, temperature taken, a brief questionnaire completed and hand sanitiser used before being allowed to enter.” from the report
Testing and isolation
The home carried out testing and had created an isolation wing for people with confirmed or suspected COVID-19.
“Temperature screening and Covid 19 testing of people and staff took place in line with government guidance.” from the report
PPE and improvement checks
Staff had received external training and used PPE safely. The provider had also completed an infection control audit and identified actions for further improvement.
“The provider had been pro-active and created an audit tool from our IPC inspection tool.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Which actions from the infection prevention and control audit were still outstanding after the inspection?
- 02How are visitors currently screened and how are visits organised?
- 03How would the home isolate someone with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 now?
- 04How often are people and staff tested, and what happens after a positive result?
- 05What training and checks are used to make sure staff put on and remove PPE safely?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only; the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 September 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.
What inspectors found, January 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with one infection-control risk being managed.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 16 and 17 November 2017. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff, managers and a health professional. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, staff files, accidents, maintenance and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems, kind care, detailed care plans, suitable food and activities, and clear management.
The previous inspection in August 2016 found breaches about safeguarding and staffing. Inspectors said the required improvements had been completed. They also found a possible cross-contamination risk because of the location of a sluice room, but staff were told to use another sluice room while a permanent solution was considered.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe. Recruitment checks were completed before staff started work.
“There were sufficient care staff deployed to meet people's needs and keep them safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported their dignity, privacy, choices and independence. Inspectors saw calm and reassuring interactions.
“We observed that staff were caring, compassionate and thoughtful and provided re-assurance to people if they were upset or unwell.” from the report
Individual care plans
Care plans covered people's physical, emotional and communication needs. They were reviewed monthly and changes were shared with staff.
“The provider had implemented an electronic care planning system which provided clear, detailed and very comprehensive care plans for each person.” from the report
Food and health support
People had choices about food and drink, including support for specific dietary needs. Health referrals were made promptly when required.
“People had a choice of food and drink which met their personal preferences and met their dietary needs.” from the report
Improved management
Inspectors found significant improvements in records, policies and quality checks since the previous inspection. Staff described the manager as approachable and supportive.
“At this inspection, we found significant improvements had been made in all areas and we had no concerns.” from the report
Sluice room layout
needs fixingThe ground-floor sluice room was reached through the laundry room. Inspectors said this could increase the risk of cross-contamination. Staff were instructed to use the first-floor sluice room while a permanent solution was considered.
“This could have increased a risk of cross contamination between soiled equipment and clean laundry.” from the report
- 01What permanent solution was put in place for the ground-floor sluice room and laundry layout?
- 02Are staff still using the first-floor sluice room to clean and disinfect soiled equipment?
- 03How will you assess and review my relative's risks, such as falls, weight loss or skin problems?
- 04How will my relative and our family be involved in reviewing the electronic care plan?
- 05What activities and support are available for someone with my relative's interests, communication needs or dementia?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering accommodation and personal care and all five CQC questions; the report also checked improvements required after the August 2016 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 January 2018 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
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.