CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Birchwood Bungalow
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found safeguarding systems, risk assessments, fire checks and recruitment processes in place. They found enough staff and trained staff who checked medicines safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs and supported independence. Staff received training and supervision, and people were supported with health appointments, nutrition and decisions made in their best interests.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed being kind, courteous and respectful. People were supported to make choices, and their privacy, dignity and independence were promoted.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's likes, dislikes, routines and communication methods. People were supported with activities, outings and contact with the community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Audits and other checks were used to identify and follow up improvements. This rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection, although interim management cover was in place because the registered manager was on long-term leave.
What inspectors found, September 2019
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with well-led improving from Requires Improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection of the home. The inspector visited on 14 August 2019 and later received feedback from relatives and social care professionals on 30 August and 3 September.
The home supported up to seven adults with learning disabilities and/or autism. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk assessments, safe medicines processes, clean surroundings and good links with health professionals.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Care plans reflected their needs, preferences and communication methods. Staff supported people to make choices, gain skills, use the community and take part in activities.
The overall rating was Good, as were Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Four areas remained Good since the previous inspection. Well-led improved from Requires Improvement to Good.
Personalised communication
Staff used several ways to help people express their views and take part in decisions about their care.
“Staff used a variety of methods people preferred to ensure they could effectively communicate and get people involved in their care.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Relatives and professionals described staff as caring. Inspectors also saw staff being courteous, kind and reassuring.
“During our visit we observed staff were always courteous and kind towards people they supported.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, develop skills and take positive risks in the home and community.
“People were encouraged to take up activities which involved positive risk taking when going shopping, visiting the day centre and using public transport.” from the report
Good oversight
Regular audits covered care plans, medicines, incidents and safety. Actions identified through checks were followed up.
“Where actions were needed, these had been followed up. For example, care plans had been updated and maintenance jobs completed.” from the report
Refurbishment was still under way
minorPainting, decorating and other environmental work were in progress during the inspection. The report says the work was planned and risk assessed, but families may want to ask about its current status.
“The environment was undergoing refurbishment, painting and decorating was in progress.” from the report
End of life preferences not yet complete
minorThe home was still exploring people's end of life preferences and choices. Ask how this work has been completed since the inspection.
“People's end of life preferences and choices were in the process of being explored.” from the report
- 01What progress has been made with the refurbishment, and how will any remaining work affect people's routines?
- 02How are each person's end of life preferences and choices now recorded and reviewed?
- 03Who is currently providing management cover while the registered manager is on long-term leave?
- 04How will you support my relative to communicate their choices, likes and dislikes?
- 05What activities and community outings would be available for my relative?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at all five CQC questions; Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive remained Good, while Well-led improved from Requires Improvement to Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 September 2019 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, February 2017
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but the home was not always well-led and some repairs were delayed.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 24 January 2017. Inspectors observed staff supporting two people, spoke with staff and the manager, contacted relatives and professionals, and reviewed care, medicines, training and quality records.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective, caring and responsive care. Inspectors found enough skilled staff, safe recruitment, suitable medicines arrangements, appropriate health support and kind relationships. People were supported with activities, personal routines and decisions as far as they were able.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for being well-led. Some repairs and refurbishment had taken too long. Inspectors also found that some daily records were completed late and one pressure mattress had not been set correctly, although the mattress setting was corrected during the inspection.
The overall rating of Good means the inspectors found the home generally provided good care. It does not mean every part was problem-free. The weaker well-led rating means the provider needed to improve how quickly it dealt with the home and its records.
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs safely and found the recruitment checks for two new staff were in place.
“There were sufficient staff members available to meet people's needs safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Relatives and a health professional praised the staff's kindness. Inspectors saw staff protecting privacy and treating people courteously.
“We saw staff promoting people's dignity and privacy knocking on people's doors and waiting before entering people's rooms.” from the report
Individual support
Care plans described people's preferences, fears, routines and abilities. Staff supported people to become more independent and take part in activities inside and outside the home.
“This showed us that care plans were individual and reflected the person's specific wishes.” from the report
Health and nutrition
People had enough good-quality food and drink, with dietary risks reviewed. Staff made appropriate referrals to health and social care professionals.
“People's day to day health needs were met in a timely way and we noted they had access to health care and social care professionals when necessary.” from the report
Delayed repairs and refurbishment
needs fixingSome bedroom areas were damaged or tatty and had remained that way for some time. Inspectors said repairs had not been dealt with promptly, although some work had been scheduled after the inspection.
“Areas of the home required maintenance and refurbishment to promote people's dignity and to make the home a more pleasant place to live.” from the report
Late daily records
needs fixingTwo people's records had not been updated during the day to show the care and activities they had received. Completing records in one go later created a risk that important details could be missed.
“Daily records were not always completed in a timely manner.” from the report
Pressure mattress setting
needs fixingOne person's pressure mattress was not set for their weight, and there had been no regular checking system. The manager corrected the setting immediately and introduced checks.
“The pressure mattress was not set at the correct setting for the person's weight.” from the report
- 01Have all the bedroom repairs and refurbishment identified by inspectors now been completed?
- 02How often is each pressure mattress checked, and who records that it is set correctly for the person's weight?
- 03How do staff make sure daily care records are completed when care happens rather than at the end of a shift?
- 04How do you manage staffing when agency staff cannot be found to cover a shift?
- 05What action has been taken since this inspection to improve the home's well-led rating?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, with observations, discussions, feedback from relatives and professionals, and reviews of care, medicines, training and quality records. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 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 Birchwood Bungalow
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Hertfordshire
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 £980 to £1,300 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.