CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Bramley Avenue
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing and controlling infections. This included visitor checks, safe PPE use, testing, cleaning, social distancing and plans for managing 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
Bramley Avenue was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 18 March 2021. Inspectors checked how well the home was prepared to prevent and control infections during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that visitors were screened and used PPE, staff used PPE safely, and people and staff had access to regular COVID-19 testing. The building was clean, uncluttered and cleaned more often, especially in areas that people touched frequently.
People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends by video and telephone. The home had pandemic guidance and had assessed health, safety and wellbeing risks.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not provide an overall rating or a full rating for all five areas of care.
PPE and visitor safety
Visitors had their temperatures checked and wore PPE. The home had enough PPE and staff had been trained to use it safely.
“Visitors to the service had their temperature taken and wore personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Testing
The report says regular COVID-19 testing was carried out for people living at the home and for staff.
“Regular COVID-19 testing for all people and staff living and working in the service was regularly carried out.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the building clean and free from clutter. Cleaning had increased, including of frequently touched surfaces.
“The building was clean and free from clutter.” from the report
Family contact
People were supported to stay in contact with family and friends through video and telephone calls.
“People were supported to have contact with their families and friends through video and telephone calls.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently checked and supported to use PPE?
- 02How often are people living at the home and staff tested for infections now?
- 03How do you keep frequently touched surfaces and the rest of the building clean?
- 04What arrangements are currently available for people to contact family and friends?
- 05What is the current plan for preventing and managing an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe area only; the home was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 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, October 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with care plans still being updated and no registered manager in post.
This was an unannounced inspection. Inspectors reviewed care plans, medicines records, recruitment checks, staff training and quality checks. They spoke with staff and managers and observed how people were supported. People had communication needs, so inspectors also used observations and records to understand their experience.
The home supported up to five people with learning difficulties. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements and suitable checks to reduce risks. Staff were trained, supported and understood people's needs. People were supported with food, healthcare, activities, relationships and choices.
Staff were kind and respectful. They protected people's privacy and dignity and involved them in everyday decisions. Care plans were being made more personalised, but this work was not yet complete. There was no registered manager at the time, although a manager was overseeing the day-to-day service and had applied to become registered.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspection found the service met the CQC's standards in each area at that time.
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored securely, given as prescribed and checked regularly. Any errors or differences in the records were investigated and action was taken.
“Medicines were administered in line with the prescriber's instructions.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors observed caring interactions. Staff supported people's dignity, privacy, choices and independence.
“During our inspection we saw caring and respectful interactions between staff and the people using the service.” from the report
Individual activities
People were supported to use local services, go into the wider community and continue hobbies and interests.
“People were supported to access the local and wider community and develop and maintain hobbies and interests.” from the report
Staff support and training
Staff received induction, training, supervision and appraisals. They said managers and colleagues were approachable.
“Staff told us they received regular supervision and appraisals.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider carried out checks covering areas such as medicines, health and safety and fire safety. Actions and progress were recorded.
“A wide range of checks and observations had been undertaken by the staff and management.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThere was no registered manager in post during the inspection. A manager was overseeing the home and had applied to become registered.
“There was not a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection.” from the report
Care plans being updated
needs fixingInspectors found that care plans needed to be more personalised and focused on current information. The update work was still in progress and was expected to take up to six months.
“The manager and operations manager had identified that people's care plans needed to be updated to ensure they were person centred” from the report
DoLS decisions pending
minorApplications had been made to the local authority, but the outcomes were not known at the time of inspection.
“DoLS applications to the local authority had been made by the manager and the outcome of these was not yet known.” from the report
- 01Is there now a registered manager, and who is responsible for the home if that person is not on duty?
- 02Were the care plan updates completed within the planned six months, and how are people involved in setting their goals and choices?
- 03What were the outcomes of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications?
- 04How do you decide how many staff are needed, especially when there is sickness or other unplanned absence?
- 05How are medicines records checked now, and what action is taken if an error or discrepancy is found?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five quality areas and was the first inspection since the service was re-registered on 1 November 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 October 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 Bramley Avenue
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 November 2016.
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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Cambridgeshire
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 £1,200 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
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.