CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Bradbury Gardens
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and risks to their safety were assessed and managed. Staffing and recruitment checks were suitable, and medicines were generally managed safely, although a medicine storage temperature was too high on the first inspection day.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff received training, supervision and support. People's health, nutrition and legal rights were supported through care plans and contact with health professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness and respect. The home promoted privacy, dignity, independence and involvement in decisions about care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support plans reflected people's individual needs, preferences and communication methods. People were supported with activities, community life, relationships and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- A registered manager was in place and managers were visible and accessible. Quality checks were used, although some staff needed clearer understanding of internal whistleblowing procedures.
What inspectors found, July 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with minor issues about medicine temperatures, activity staffing and whistleblowing guidance.
This was the first inspection of the home. It was unannounced and took place on 25 May and 5 June 2017. One inspector spoke with people living there, staff, managers and relatives, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training and the building.
The inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and avoidable risks. Staffing and recruitment checks were suitable, medicines were generally managed safely, and people's health needs were supported. Staff were trained and supported, and people's rights under the Mental Capacity Act were followed.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Care plans were detailed and tailored to people's needs, interests and communication. The home supported independence, community activities and complaints. All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives described staff as kind, caring and willing to listen. Inspectors observed staff speaking respectfully and checking people's consent before entering rooms.
“People using the service told us "staff are very nice, they make us happy, and they listen".” from the report
Promoting independence
The home helped people build practical skills and confidence for more independent living. Support included budgeting, cooking, shopping, mobility and communication.
“The service worked to ensure people developed their independence and gained important life skills.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included detailed information about people's routines, preferences, communication and behaviour. Staff used this information to provide individual support.
“People received care that was personalised and responsive to their needs.” from the report
Activities and community life
People were supported to take part in varied activities at home and in the community, including trips, sport, entertainment and holidays.
“People were supported to take part in activities in the community.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff had role-specific training, a three-week induction, supervision and appraisals. The report found good communication and teamwork.
“Staff described good communication and effective teamwork.” from the report
Medicine storage temperature
needs fixingThe temperature where some medicines were stored was too high on the first inspection day. The manager acted to lower it, changed guidance for checks and installed window film before the second visit.
“We found the storage temperature of medicines stored in the nurses' office was too high on the first day of our visit.” from the report
Staffing for community activities
needs fixingOne person said there were not always enough staff to support planned community activities. A deputy manager agreed to look into this.
“However one person felt there were not always enough staff to support them with activities they had planned in the community.” from the report
Whistleblowing guidance
minorSome staff were unclear about the organisation's internal whistleblowing procedure. The manager took action to clarify this at team meetings.
“While some staff demonstrated an awareness and understanding of whistleblowing procedures within the provider's organisation, others were unclear about internal whistleblowing procedures” from the report
- 01How do you now check and record medicine storage temperatures, especially during warm weather?
- 02How do you make sure there are enough familiar staff for each person's planned community activities?
- 03How are new and existing staff taught the internal whistleblowing procedure?
- 04How are people's individual communication methods and daily preferences kept up to date in their support plans?
- 05How do people and their relatives take part in regular care reviews and raise concerns?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 July 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 Bradbury Gardens
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- July 2017Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 July 2015.
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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Gloucestershire
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 £1,030 to £1,360 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.