CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Bernhard Baron Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, appropriate safeguarding arrangements and safe medicine systems. Environmental risks, fire safety and infection control were also managed well.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's health, nutrition and hydration needs were assessed and supported. Staff received training and people were supported to make their own choices.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, respectful and attentive. People were involved in decisions about their care and supported to keep their privacy, dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care was exceptionally personalised. People helped shape the activities and ran groups, with support to maintain friendships, interests and community links.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team promoted an open and inclusive culture and involved people in running the home. Some audits and improvements to care plans were still being developed.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Bernhard Baron Cottage Homes was rated Good overall, with Outstanding responsiveness and highly personalised care.
This was a planned inspection over three days. One inspector and an expert by experience spoke with 12 people and 15 staff, observed care, meals and activities, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The inspectors found people were safe, treated kindly and supported to maintain their health and independence. Staffing and recruitment were safe, medicines were managed properly, and the home was clean and well maintained.
The strongest area was responsiveness, rated Outstanding. People helped lead activities and forums, and the home offered a wide range of meaningful activities, friendships and community involvement. Safe improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection, while the other areas stayed at Good.
Overall, Good means the inspectors found the home met the required standards and provided good care. It does not mean every record or process was perfect. Some care plans did not contain all the information staff might need, although staff knew people well and this had not affected their care.
Personalised care
Staff knew people's histories, preferences and wishes. New residents could have a buddy to help them settle in and make connections.
“People received an exceptionally personalised service that met their specific needs, preferences and wishes.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People helped create and run activities such as music, gardening, poetry and craft groups. They were also supported to try new interests and take part in the local community.
“There was an exceptional activity program and people were consistently supported to take part in a variety of stimulating and meaningful activities” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw relaxed relationships and a friendly atmosphere. Staff respected people's choices, privacy, dignity and different beliefs.
“Staff in all roles were highly motivated and offered care and support which was caring, kind and compassionate.” from the report
Improved safety
The home had improved recruitment, medicines and environmental safety since the previous inspection. Medicines were given at times suited to people's health needs.
“At this inspection we found improvements had been made.” from the report
Some care plans lacked detail
minorSome care plans did not include all the information staff might need, including details about activities people enjoyed and some aspects of care. Inspectors said this had not affected people because staff knew them well.
“We noted that some care plans did not include all information staff may need” from the report
Some audits were still to be completed
minorThe management team had identified reviews of staff files and care plans as needed, but these had not yet started at the inspection.
“Other audits had been identified as needing to be completed and these included a review of staff files and care plan audits.” from the report
- 01How are care plans checked and updated so they include activities, preferences and all aspects of care?
- 02When will the planned staff file and care plan audits be completed, and what will happen if they find gaps?
- 03What support is available in the main building if someone living in a cottage becomes less independent?
- 04How are residents involved in choosing activities, meals and changes to daily life?
- 05How will medicines be managed if my relative wants to continue managing some of their own medicines?
This was a planned inspection covering all five key questions; inspectors did not review care plans for people living independently in the cottages because they did not receive regular support. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 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.
What inspectors found, December 2016
Bernhard Baron Care Home is rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, responsive care, but safety needed improvement.
Inspectors visited without warning on 16 and 22 September 2016. They spoke with people living in the home, a visitor, staff and managers. They observed care and checked care plans, risk assessments, staff records, medicines information and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were all rated Good. People described kind care, good food, plenty of activities and staff who respected their choices, privacy and independence.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found gaps in checks for volunteers, no legionella risk assessment, missing smoke detectors in an attic space and weaknesses in medicines records and storage. Paid staff recruitment checks were complete, staffing levels were enough, and individual risks were generally well managed.
Good staff training
Staff had a thorough induction and regular training, supervision and appraisal. Training covered dementia, moving and handling and other specific care needs.
“Staff were well supported with training, supervision and appraisal.” from the report
Meaningful activities
The home offered a wide range of group and individual activities. These were shaped around people's interests and choices.
“There was an extensive activity programme which everyone was welcome to participate in as they chose.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in their care and daily decisions. Some people lived independently in cottages and could move to the main house if they needed more support.
“People were supported to be as independent as they wanted to be.” from the report
Learning from incidents
Accidents and incidents were investigated and care plans and risk assessments were changed when needed to reduce the chance of a repeat.
“The registered manager and staff understood the importance of learning from incidents so they could make improvements.” from the report
Volunteer checks
needs fixingNot all required recruitment information had been obtained before volunteers started work. The report says paid employee checks had been completed.
“Not all of the relevant checks were completed for people who volunteered at the service.” from the report
Water safety assessment
seriousThere was no legionella risk assessment or schedule for actions such as flushing showers and descaling water outlets. Water test results had been negative.
“A legionella risk assessment had not been completed.” from the report
Fire safety equipment
seriousThe provider could not show that additional smoke detectors had been fitted in an attic space. Further checks confirmed they had not been fitted.
“After further checks, the trustees representative confirmed the smoke detectors had not been fitted.” from the report
Medicines records and storage
seriousMedicines records did not include photographs or body charts for prescribed creams. Medicines were stored in different trolleys, creating a risk that a dose could be missed.
“People's medicines administration record (MAR) did not contain a photograph of the person.” from the report
- 01What action has been taken to complete all required checks for volunteers?
- 02Has a legionella risk assessment now been completed, and what routine water safety checks are carried out?
- 03Have the missing smoke detectors been fitted and recorded as complete?
- 04Do medicines records now include photographs and body charts where needed?
- 05How are medicines stored and checked so that doses are not missed?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 December 2016 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 Bernhard Baron Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- December 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
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.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 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
19 live-in carers within about an hour of East 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 £1,000 to £1,400 a week. 13 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“When he point blank refused to go into hospital for a life saving blood transfusion she talked him through the situation and agreed to go in the ambulance with him and stayed until he was settled.”
“Una felt safe, secure and loved in her time with Debbie which is a gift that I am eternally grateful for.”
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.