CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Berkeley Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were in place, including safe use of protective equipment, testing, admissions, visiting and outbreak management. The provider also said it had measures to reduce the risks from COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Outstanding
- 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, February 2022
Berkeley Lodge was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 safety measures.
Inspectors visited on 12 January 2022. The visit was announced 24 hours in advance and focused on infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, supporting testing, managing admissions and visits safely, and keeping its infection control policy up to date. They were also assured that non-exempt staff and visiting professionals were vaccinated against COVID-19.
The home had introduced online booking for visits, while still allowing relatives to book by telephone. Its website gave information about visiting, protective equipment, testing and isolation. The service had also put support in place for staff wellbeing.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating.
Visiting arrangements
The home had introduced online booking for visits and still allowed people to telephone if they preferred. Visitors were given clear information about the requirements when they arrived.
“The service had introduced an online booking system to facilitate safe visiting.” from the report
Infection control information
The provider's website contained updated information about visiting, protective equipment, testing and isolation. Visitors were asked to confirm that they understood the requirements.
“This included clear information about visiting, the requirement to wear personal protective equipment (PPE), testing and when isolation would be required.” from the report
COVID-19 safety measures
Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, supporting testing and managing infection risks, including possible outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Staff wellbeing support
The provider recognised the pressure caused by the pandemic and had resources to support staff wellbeing across its homes.
“They had resources in place to support staff wellbeing across the provider's group of homes” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are COVID-19-related staffing pressures affecting people's care and support now?
- 02How can relatives book visits, and what happens if someone cannot use the online booking system?
- 03How do you check that visitors understand the current requirements about protective equipment, testing and isolation?
- 04Have the planned reflective sessions for managers taken place, and what other wellbeing support is available to staff?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not provide ratings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 February 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, January 2020
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding effective care; inspectors found kind, personalised support and one medicines practice issue.
This was an unannounced inspection on 23 October 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files, audits, complaints and incident records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, caring, responsive and well-led were all rated Good. Effective was rated Outstanding, improving from Good at the previous inspection.
Inspectors found strong healthcare support, detailed care planning, kind staff and personalised activities. People were supported with their health, independence, communication, relationships and end of life wishes.
There was one occasion when medicines best practice was not followed during lunch. This was dealt with on the day, and inspectors said the risk of harm was low.
Strong healthcare support
The home worked closely with local health services and used checks to identify changes in people's health promptly. Inspectors saw examples of improved mobility, wellbeing and reduced hospital admissions.
“Care delivery and clinical governance were highly integrated with local community health services which meant people accessed healthcare in a timely way with an integrated approach.” from the report
Personalised dementia care
Staff used detailed information about people's backgrounds, preferences and behaviour to reduce anxiety and improve wellbeing. The dementia area was designed to help people feel calm and orientated.
“The service had developed close links with local health organisations.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw caring interactions and support that respected people's privacy, dignity and independence.
“We observed pleasant caring interactions between people and staff.” from the report
Activities matched to people
The home offered planned and spontaneous activities based on people's interests. Staff helped people maintain relationships and take part in meaningful events.
“Activities were varied and based on people's interests and suggestions.” from the report
Detailed care planning
Care plans recorded people's routines, preferences, backgrounds and specific support needs. These plans were regularly reviewed and used by staff.
“The level of detail within care plans was consistently high and regularly reviewed.” from the report
One medicines practice issue
minorInspectors saw one occasion when medicines best practice was not followed during lunch. Staff were spoken to immediately and the report says the risk of harm was low.
“We made one observation where medicines best practice was not followed during lunch.” from the report
- 01What happened during the medicines incident at lunchtime, and what was done to prevent it happening again?
- 02How are people's health and wellbeing goals, such as mobility or oral health, reviewed?
- 03How would staff respond if a person with dementia became anxious or agitated without immediately using medicines?
- 04How are activities matched to my relative's interests, communication needs and relationships?
- 05What progress has been made with the planned sensory room and the Namaste end of life care approach?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at the premises and care and rated all five key questions; the previous inspection was published on 27 April 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 January 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 Berkeley Lodge
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 January 2011.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
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 £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.