CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Birchwood House Rest Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, arranged testing, maintained hygiene and distancing, and had plans to prevent or manage infection 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, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and support for contact, visits and activities.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 1 March 2021. It looked at how the home prevented and controlled COVID-19 infection.
Inspectors were assured that staff used protective equipment safely, testing was available, and the home had suitable hygiene, distancing and visiting arrangements. They found plans to isolate people if needed and good supplies of protective equipment.
The home was clean and free from clutter. People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends and had activities to support their wellbeing.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other four questions.
Family contact and visiting
People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends by telephone and internet. Visits were arranged in ways intended to reduce infection risks.
“People were well supported by staff to have telephone and internet contact with their family and friends.” from the report
Infection control
The home had isolation plans, readily available protective equipment and regular COVID-19 testing for staff and residents.
“Plans were in place to isolate people with COVID-19 to minimise transmission.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the building clean and without clutter.
“The building was clean and free from clutter.” from the report
Activities and wellbeing
Staff provided stimulation and activities to support people's wellbeing.
“Staff ensured people's well-being had been maintained and they had sufficient stimulation, such as activities.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are residents and staff currently tested for COVID-19?
- 02What arrangements are now used for family visits, including outdoor or room-based visits?
- 03How would you isolate a resident who had COVID-19 or was exposed to infection?
- 04Where are protective equipment supplies kept, and how are staff trained to use them?
- 05What activities are currently available to support residents' wellbeing and stimulation?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not assess the other four questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 April 2021 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, September 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a planned fire alarm upgrade still outstanding.
Inspectors visited without notice on 10 July 2018. They spoke with people, relatives, staff, managers and a health professional. They also reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files, rotas, training records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were protected from harm, received their medicines safely and had enough staff to meet their needs.
Inspectors found that staff knew people well and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect. Care was personalised, people were supported to make choices, and food, activities and communication were adapted to individual needs.
The rating stayed Good, as it had been at the previous inspection. The home had acted on the earlier recommendation to provide extra training for staff in ancillary roles.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff offering reassurance, explaining choices and supporting people at their own pace. People were treated as individuals and their privacy and dignity were respected.
“We observed staff treating people with kindness and respect, for example, staff holding people's hand to give them reassurance.” from the report
Safe staffing and risk management
There were enough staff to meet people's needs without rushing them. Individual risks were reviewed and guidance was available to help staff reduce those risks.
“There were enough staff on duty who knew people well and could meet their needs and support them to do things for themselves.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's histories, preferences, health needs and communication requirements. Staff demonstrated that they knew how each person wanted their care delivered.
“People's records and care plans contained personalised information such as life histories, personal care needs, preferences and medical conditions.” from the report
Good management oversight
The provider and manager checked the quality of care, reviewed incidents and involved staff and people in the running of the home. Staff described the management team as approachable and supportive.
“The registered manager operated an open and transparent culture.” from the report
Food and healthcare support
People had food choices and drinks were offered during the day. Staff worked with health professionals and supported people to attend appointments.
“Meals were balanced and included fresh vegetables.” from the report
Fire alarm upgrade pending
minorThe Fire Service had asked for an addressable fire alarm to be fitted. At the inspection, the provider had received quotes, so families should check whether the work was completed.
“They asked for an addressable fire alarm to be fitted and the provider had received quotes for the work.” from the report
- 01Has the addressable fire alarm requested by the Fire Service now been fitted, and when was it last checked?
- 02How will you review my relative's risks and update their care plan if their needs change?
- 03How will you make sure my relative receives medicines in the way prescribed and suited to their needs?
- 04What activities and daily routines would be available to match my relative's interests and preferences?
- 05How would you respond if my relative or our family wanted to make a complaint?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC questions and both the accommodation and care provided; the previous Good ratings were maintained. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 September 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 Birchwood House Rest Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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 £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.