CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Blackberry Hill
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection risks were being well controlled.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 3 February 2021. It checked infection prevention and control measures during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found hand-cleaning and shoe-disinfection arrangements at the entrance. Visitors completed health declarations and had their temperatures checked. Staff had infection-control training, used protective equipment properly and had enough supplies.
The home had extra cleaning, social-distancing arrangements, safe admission procedures and regular Covid-19 testing. Inspectors were also assured that the home had suitable policies, communication systems and plans to manage disruption.
The home was inspected but not rated. This was not a full inspection of all five areas of care, so it does not provide an overall quality rating.
Infection control training and equipment
Staff had training in infection control and inspectors saw them using protective equipment correctly. Supplies were adequate.
“Staff had received training in infection control, including how to safely put on and take off personal protective equipment (PPE)” from the report
Clean environment
The home had increased cleaning of frequently touched areas and was described as clean and well maintained.
“Staff we spoke with were confident and knowledgeable about how to protect people from the risk of infection and the environment was clean and well maintained.” from the report
Contact with relatives
The home provided garden visits and video calls, with systems for communicating with relatives. The report says relatives had given positive feedback about communication.
“An allocated area was used in the garden for visits. Staff also supported people to keep in touch with their relatives via video calling.” from the report
Safe admissions and testing
New admissions required a negative Covid-19 test and a 14-day period of isolation. Regular testing was carried out for staff and people living in the home.
“No one would be admitted without a negative Covid-19 test first and they would isolate for 14 days.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently checked before entering the home?
- 02How often are frequently touched areas cleaned now?
- 03What infection-control training and protective equipment do staff currently receive?
- 04What is the current procedure for new admissions, including testing and isolation?
- 05How can residents currently keep in touch with relatives if visits are restricted?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 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, January 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, but noted staff vacancies, turnover and some communication concerns.
This was a comprehensive, announced inspection on 4 December 2017. The inspector met all nine people living at the home, spoke with relatives, staff, the registered manager and a health professional, and reviewed care records, staff files and safety checks.
The home supports up to 10 people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely and there were enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff were trained and understood people's health and communication needs.
Inspectors saw kind and respectful care. People had individual support plans, regular activities and support to maintain family relationships. The home was found to be well organised, with checks in place to identify and fix problems.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home was also rated Good at the previous inspection in April 2015, so this report says the rating remained Good.
Safe care
Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, safeguarding procedures were understood, and medicines were administered safely.
“Medicine records were clear and complete and regular audits ensured medicines were kept and administered safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff supported people's dignity, privacy and choices. They used people's individual communication methods and involved them in everyday activities.
“Staff engaged with people in a friendly, respectful and caring way which included them in activities of daily living, such as preparing lunch.” from the report
Activities and individual support
People had a range of internal and external activities, including music therapy, shopping, horse riding and arts and crafts.
“People using the service were supported to enjoy meaningful activities according to their preferences and capabilities.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff received regular training, induction, supervision and appraisals. Inspectors found staff were competent and understood the people they supported.
“Staff received regular training in all subjects relating to providing safe and effective care.” from the report
Organised management
The registered manager used audits, meetings and provider checks to monitor the service and identify improvements.
“Audits and checks were carried out in-house and through the provider so any problem could be identified and rectified.” from the report
Staff turnover and vacancies
needs fixingRelatives were concerned that staff turnover could reduce consistency of care. The home had three vacancies and was recruiting at the time of the inspection.
“People's family members were concerned about the turnover of staff which they felt led to less consistency of care for people.” from the report
Communication with families
needs fixingSome relatives felt communication was not always as good as they wanted, especially about changes in staffing arrangements.
“Some people's family members said they did not always feel communication had been as good as they wanted.” from the report
Language used about adults
minorInspectors noted that a family magazine referred to people as children. The registered manager said this would be considered, while staff were observed using people's names and treating them with dignity.
“We noted that people receiving the service were referred to as 'your children', which does not afford them the dignity of being adults of equal status to other citizens.” from the report
One outstanding legal authorisation
needs fixingA legal authorisation was in place for all but one person at the time of the inspection. Families should ask about the current position.
“There had been a DoLS application for each person using the service for their protection and all but one had a legal authorisation in place to deprive them of their liberty.” from the report
- 01How many staff vacancies remain now, and how are you maintaining consistency for people while recruiting?
- 02What has changed to improve communication with families about staffing arrangements and other important changes?
- 03What is the current position of the outstanding legal authorisation mentioned in the inspection report?
- 04How do you make sure each person's communication method is understood by new or temporary staff?
- 05What action was taken after inspectors raised the use of the phrase 'your children' in the family magazine?
This was a comprehensive, announced inspection covering all five rating areas; the inspector met all nine people using the home and reviewed two people's care records, two staff files and management and safety records. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 January 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 Blackberry Hill
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 June 2014.
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
76 live-in carers within about two hours of Somerset
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 £1,370 a week. 62 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
“She was not phased by anything, she was adaptable, kind & gave us complete confidence to go away & not worry about a thing!”
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.