CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Bayford House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and reviewed, staffing levels were adjusted to people's needs, medicines were managed safely and the home was clean.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences. Staff had relevant training and worked with health professionals when people needed additional support.
- Caring?
- Good
- People described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw warm, respectful interactions and found that people were supported to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and reviewed with people and relatives. Activities reflected people's interests, and complaints and concerns were recorded and investigated.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and staff understood their roles and used audits, meetings and feedback to improve the service. People and relatives said management was approachable.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Bayford House Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but one unit needed refurbishment and more dementia-friendly features.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 28 January 2020. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed meals and medicines, and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files, complaints, accidents and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably recruited staff, safe medicines systems, clean premises, staff with suitable training, and care that reflected people's needs and choices.
People and relatives described staff as kind, respectful and responsive. The home offered activities and involved people in their care. However, the Bayford House unit was worn and did not have dementia-friendly areas. A refurbishment was planned for that year.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw calm and compassionate interactions. People were treated with dignity and staff supported them to make choices.
“The atmosphere in the service was calm, compassionate and inclusive.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Staffing levels were reviewed as people's needs changed. Inspectors found trained staff administering medicines safely and checking for errors or omissions.
“People were supported with their medicines by trained staff that had their competency checked.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, relationships, hobbies, preferences and communication needs. Staff demonstrated good knowledge of the people they supported.
“Staff demonstrated their in-depth knowledge of people's histories, their likes and dislikes and how they wished to be supported” from the report
Activities and social links
People could take part in activities such as cards, music, knitting and exercise. The home also welcomed children from a local school.
“We saw activities were planned for the week. Individual activities were also carried out, for those people receiving care in their bedroom.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff were encouraged to give their views. The management team used audits, meetings and feedback to identify improvements.
“There was an 'open door' management approach. The management team were easily available to staff, relatives and people living in the home.” from the report
Bayford House needed updating
needs fixingThe Bayford House unit was described as worn and tired. Inspectors also found no dementia-friendly areas or adaptations to help people recognise their bedrooms.
“Bayford House unit was notably worn and tired in décor.” from the report
Limited dementia-friendly design
needs fixingThe report said the unit did not provide areas to stimulate people living with dementia or features to help them identify their own rooms. A refurbishment was planned.
“There were no dementia friendly areas in place to provide stimulation to those who were living with the disease” from the report
- 01Has the planned refurbishment of the Bayford House unit been completed, and what changes were made?
- 02What dementia-friendly areas or features are now available for people living in Bayford House?
- 03How will staff help a person with dementia recognise their own bedroom and move around the unit?
- 04How are staffing levels reviewed when people's care needs change?
- 05How are relatives involved in creating and reviewing care plans?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, including both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 February 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, July 2017
Bayford House Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with minor points about meals and an uneven path.
This was a comprehensive inspection on 3 and 4 July 2017. The first day was unannounced and the second was announced. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and professionals. They also reviewed care plans, staff records, complaints, accidents and safety checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practices, suitable training and good support with health, food and daily care. People were treated kindly, their privacy was respected, and activities were tailored to their interests.
The report says improvements had been made since the previous inspection in February 2015, when the service needed to improve its activities and contact for people who might become isolated. Inspectors found regular one-to-one activities, more trips out and better community involvement at this inspection.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to keep people safe and meet their needs. Medicines were given by trained staff whose competence had been checked.
“Medicines were managed safely either by the registered nurses or a senior care worker who had received appropriate training.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were described as caring and compassionate. Inspectors saw staff protect people's privacy and support their independence.
“People continued to be supported by staff who were caring, compassionate and kind.” from the report
Activities and inclusion
The home had widened its activities programme. It included one-to-one time, trips out, garden activities and links with the local community.
“A full programme of activities were available including individual sessions for people at risk of social isolation.” from the report
Good oversight
The home used audits, reviews and an improvement plan to identify and address issues. Inspectors found an open culture and good teamwork.
“A system of audits and checks to monitor the quality of the service was in place.” from the report
Meals were not always consistent
minorSome people did not always enjoy the meals. One person said the food varied depending on who was preparing it.
“However, some people said they did not always enjoy the meals and one commented that food varied depending on who was preparing it.” from the report
Delay between meal courses
minorInspectors noticed a delay between the first and second courses in one unit. The manager was aware and was considering changes.
“We noted in Bayford House there was some delay between the first and second course.” from the report
Uneven path
minorA path in the grounds was uneven and needed levelling. The report says this had been identified and was being considered as part of the improvement programme.
“For example, a path through the ground had been identified as uneven and in need of levelling.” from the report
- 01What has been done to make meals more consistent between different staff preparing them?
- 02What changes have been made to reduce delays between the first and second courses?
- 03Has the uneven path in the grounds now been levelled, and how are outdoor risks checked?
- 04How are one-to-one activities provided for people who stay in their rooms or are at risk of becoming isolated?
- 05What is the current position on the home manager's application to become the registered manager?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five ratings, carried out over 3 and 4 July 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 July 2017 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 Bayford House Care Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 October 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
42 live-in carers within about an hour of West Berkshire
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. 36 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“Titus has compassion, patience, a great sense of humour and a very professional attitude.”
“Barbara treated my mother-in-law with enormous love and compassion and provided an environment where she could feel safe and seen”
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.