CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Brackenbridge House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, safeguarding systems were in place, staffing and recruitment were suitable, and medicines were handled safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found better audits, learning from incidents and stronger oversight. Staff said they felt supported by the management team.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Brackenbridge House is rated Good; inspectors found safer systems and better management, with a small number of care plans needing updates.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 5 April 2023. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They also reviewed care plans, medicines records, recruitment records and other checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, medicines were handled safely, recruitment checks were completed and people said they felt safe.
The provider had improved since the previous inspection, which was rated Requires Improvement. The home was no longer in breach of the regulations that had applied at that time.
This inspection only covered Safe and Well-led. The ratings for the other areas were carried over from the previous inspection, so this report does not give fresh findings about those areas.
Risk management
The home had developed detailed risk assessments, including for people using the stairs. Staff updated plans after incidents such as falls.
“The provider had identified, assessed, monitored and mitigated risks in relation to people's care and support.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were securely stored, records were clear and staff had training and competency checks.
“We saw staff administered people's medicine in a kind, caring and supportive manner.” from the report
Learning from incidents
Incidents, accidents and safeguarding concerns were investigated. The home recorded lessons learned and actions to reduce future risks.
“A shared learning tool was completed in relation to incident, accidents and safeguarding to identify the outcome of any investigation.” from the report
Person-centred information
Care plans included people's backgrounds, preferences and cultural or religious needs. Staff showed they understood how to support people.
“People's care plans were detailed and provided information on the person's background, life experiences, likes and dislikes.” from the report
Some care plans were out of date
needs fixingTwo care plans did not fully reflect people's current support needs at the time of the inspection. The provider updated them immediately afterwards, but families should check how updates are maintained.
“During the inspection we saw 2 people's care plans included sections which had not been updated to reflect all of their current support needs.” from the report
- 01How often are care plans reviewed, and how do you make sure they reflect changes in a person's support needs?
- 02How do staff know when a care plan has been changed, and how is this checked in practice?
- 03How do you assess staffing levels against the changing needs of people living here?
- 04What lessons have been learned from recent falls, accidents or safeguarding concerns?
- 05What were the ratings and findings for Effective, Caring and Responsive at the previous inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 May 2023 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, July 2022
Brackenbridge House was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care but ongoing safety and management problems.
This was an unannounced inspection on 7 June 2022. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, staff and a visiting healthcare professional. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines, recruitment, training, risk assessments and quality checks.
People were generally treated kindly and their care needs were met. Inspectors found good practice in effective care, caring relationships and personalised support. Medicines were usually given safely, and people had access to food, drinks and healthcare.
However, risks were not always assessed or controlled. These included unsafe access to stairs, damaged furnishings, an unattended hot drink, some medicines recording problems and infection control shortfalls. The provider was still in breach of Regulation 12 and Regulation 17, as it had been at the previous inspection.
Kind and respectful staff
People had good relationships with staff. Inspectors saw staff being kind, friendly and attentive to people's wellbeing.
“The staff were kind, caring and polite to people.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans contained information about people's needs and preferences, and staff knew about them. People were involved in decisions about their care.
“People received personalised care which met their needs and reflected their preferences.” from the report
Support with health and nutrition
People received support to eat and drink enough and to access healthcare. Their health, nutrition and hydration needs were assessed and reviewed.
“People received their medicines in a safe way, had support to stay healthy, to access healthcare services and had enough to eat and drink.” from the report
Enough staff and prompt call bells
Inspectors found there were enough staff to meet people's needs. Call bells were answered promptly.
“Call bells were answered promptly and the staff paid people attention and responded when people needed help.” from the report
Risks around stairs and the environment
seriousRisks from stairs, steps and damaged furnishings had not always been assessed or made safe. Inspectors also saw an unattended hot drink and a spill that was not cleared promptly.
“The provider had not always assessed, monitored and mitigated risks.” from the report
Medicines records and storage
needs fixingOne prescribed medicine was missing from a person's records, and the exact time of another time-critical medicine was not recorded. Medicines storage was cluttered and a pill crusher had residue in it.
“We identified some improvements were needed to the recording and monitoring of medicines.” from the report
Safeguarding notifications
seriousThe home investigated allegations and incidents, but had not always told the local authority or CQC when allegations were made. This meant external agencies could not scrutinise concerns at the right stage.
“However, they had not always informed the local safeguarding authority or CQC about the allegations of potential abuse people had raised.” from the report
Quality systems did not find problems
seriousThe home's checks had not always identified environmental risks, unsafe practices or conflicting information in a do not attempt resuscitation record.
“The provider's systems and processes had not always been operated effectively enough to assess, monitor and mitigate risks.” from the report
Activities were not always delivered
minorSome people said planned activities did not always happen. The activities coordinator was sometimes used for care tasks instead.
“Some people said that the planned activities did not always take place.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to control access to the staircases and assess the other steps?
- 02How are medicines records now checked, especially for time-critical medicines and medicines given by visiting nursing staff?
- 03What has been done to improve deep cleaning, clinical waste collection and correct use of PPE?
- 04How are safeguarding allegations now reported to the local authority and CQC?
- 05How will you make sure planned activities take place when the activities coordinator is needed for care work?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control, with a partial tour of the environment and a review of selected records. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 July 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.
Every inspection of Brackenbridge House
5 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2022Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 May 2017.
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 Hillingdon
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 £1,320 a week. 81 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult times.”
“She has an unusual combination of kindness and firmness, is quite unflappable, physically strong, extremely savvy”
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.