CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Braywood Gardens
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found risks with storage, windows, cleanliness, food safety and care records.
Inspectors visited unannounced on 30 October and 9 November 2023. They spoke with relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care records, medicines records, staff files and infection control arrangements.
They found several safety problems. Harmful products were not always locked away, some windows had no restrictors or risk assessments, and some people did not receive help promptly. Parts of the home were unclean, and food storage checks were not reliable.
The home had not always acted on accidents, incidents and previous checks. Care plans were not always updated. The overall rating fell from Good to Requires Improvement. The inspection was focused on Safe and Well-led, so the other ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection.
Medicines
Medicines were managed and administered safely. Staff had training and their competence had been checked.
“Staff had received training to safely administer medicines.” from the report
Safeguarding
Staff understood how to report suspected abuse. Relatives said they felt people were safe and knew who to contact with concerns.
“Relatives told us they felt their family members were safe.” from the report
Listening to feedback
Relatives were asked for their views through questionnaires, and the provider worked with external professionals and local safeguarding teams.
“Relatives told us they received questionnaires to offer their opinions about the service and express their views.” from the report
Unsafe storage and windows
seriousThickening powder and cleaning products could be accessed by people. Four first-floor windows could be opened fully without restrictors, and risks had not been assessed.
“Potentially harmful products were not always stored securely.” from the report
Cleanliness and food safety
seriousSome furniture and cushions were dirty or stained, and kitchenettes were not thoroughly clean. Opened food was not always labelled and fridge temperature records were unreliable.
“People were at risk of infection.” from the report
Delays in support
needs fixingInspectors saw people waiting for help, including help after using a call button and support to go to the toilet.
“Staff were not always prompt in providing support to people.” from the report
Care records and improvement systems
seriousAccident and incident information was not always used to update care plans. The provider's systems did not consistently ensure that safety actions were completed and sustained.
“The provider did not always use information from incident and accident reports to update care plans.” from the report
- 01How have you secured thickening powder, cleaning products and other potentially harmful items?
- 02Have all window risks been assessed, and are restrictors now fitted wherever needed?
- 03How do you check that communal areas, furniture, cushions and kitchenettes remain clean?
- 04How are opened foods labelled and fridge temperatures checked when equipment is faulty?
- 05How have you improved response times to call bells and requests for help, and how do you monitor this?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the Effective, Caring and Responsive ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 December 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, April 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, effective and well-led care, with some medicines guidance and cleaning issues dealt with during the inspection.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 14 and 21 March 2023, spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, and reviewed care records, staff files and other documents.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm, supported with medicines, nutrition and healthcare, and cared for by trained staff.
The inspection followed concerns about staffing and care quality. Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from these concerns. Some problems were found, including missing information in some as-required medicines guidance and areas that were not clean on the first day. These were addressed promptly.
Risk management
Risks such as falls, weight loss, choking and emotional distress were assessed and reflected in care plans. Staff knew how to respond and when to involve health professionals.
“Potential risks to people had been assessed, managed and mitigated effectively.” from the report
Trained staff
Inspectors found staff were suitably trained and supported. They had induction and ongoing training related to their roles.
“People were supported by staff who were suitably trained to meet their needs.” from the report
Healthcare support
Staff made timely referrals and worked proactively with healthcare professionals. People's oral healthcare needs were also included in care plans.
“People were supported to access required healthcare services and, overall, staff and management worked well with other agencies.” from the report
Improving leadership
The new registered manager had made positive changes, including more activities and better systems for learning from incidents and feedback.
“The service had a new registered manager, who had made positive changes to the service to improve the quality of care delivered.” from the report
Involvement and activities
People, relatives and staff were invited to meetings and events. The home had a planned calendar that included activities such as book club and pet therapy.
“People, staff and the public were pro-actively engaged and encouraged to be involved in the service.” from the report
As-required medicines guidance
needs fixingSome guidance for staff about as-required medicines was missing or incomplete. The registered manager addressed this immediately after it was raised.
“However, we found guidance (PRN protocols) for staff around these specific medicines were not all in place and some were missing information.” from the report
Night-time response
needs fixingSome people said they sometimes had to wait for support at night. Management said previous staffing problems and high agency use had been addressed through permanent recruitment.
“People told us they had no concerns with getting support during the day, however they did feel they sometimes had to wait at night.” from the report
Cleaning
minorSome areas had not been properly cleaned on the first inspection day. This was corrected promptly, and inspectors had no concerns on the second day.
“On the first day of inspection, we did find some areas of the home to have not been properly cleaned, however we fed this back to the registered manager who arranged for this to be rectified promptly.” from the report
Following healthcare advice
needs fixingA healthcare professional said advice was not always followed fully on some occasions. Ask how the home checks that professional advice is acted on.
“On some occasions advice is not always followed to the letter.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure every as-required medicine has complete guidance for staff?
- 02How quickly do staff respond to call bells at night, and what checks are made on night-time staffing?
- 03How do you check that advice from healthcare professionals is followed and recorded?
- 04What cleaning checks are now in place following the areas found not to be properly cleaned?
- 05How have staffing levels and agency use changed since the concerns that led to this inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were used to calculate the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 April 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.
Every inspection of Braywood Gardens
7 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- December 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2023Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2021Goodup from InadequateSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- October 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: InadequateResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 March 2012.
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
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
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. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
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.