CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Brentwood Arches Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk assessments, safe equipment and good systems for medicines and infection control. Some plans for medicines taken when needed lacked detail, although staff were knowledgeable and the issue was already being addressed.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had detailed assessments and received support from trained staff. Food, drink, health appointments and legal decision-making were managed well. Inspectors noted that some strongly patterned carpets could cause disorientation or falls, with changes planned.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and respectful. They promoted privacy, dignity, independence and choice. Some cultural and personal preferences were not fully recorded in care plans, although inspectors found no impact on people at the time.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and adapted when people's needs changed. Activities, communication support, family contact and complaints systems worked well. End-of-life care was provided, but plans did not always record people's future care needs and preferences in enough detail.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers had good oversight, staff worked well together and audits led to improvements. The culture was described as open and person-centred, although communication between some senior and care staff could be improved.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Brentwood Arches Care Home: the supplied report is for another home, which was rated Good overall, with end-of-life planning needing improvement.
The supplied report is headed Signature at The Beeches, not Brentwood Arches Care Home. It describes a planned inspection of a newly registered care home, carried out over 30 March, 31 March and 5 April 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and health and social care professionals, observed care and checked records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines support, good infection control, personalised care, kind interactions and a positive management culture.
There were some areas to improve. End-of-life care plans did not always contain enough detail. Some personal preferences were not fully recorded, some medicines plans lacked detail and patterned carpets could cause problems for people with dementia or perception difficulties. The inspectors made a recommendation about end-of-life care planning.
Enough staff
Inspectors saw enough staff to provide safe and personalised support. Staffing was organised flexibly when needs changed.
“We observed throughout our inspection that there were enough staff to provide safe, good quality support.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported people to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“We observed caring interactions between staff and people. Staff spent quality time with people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences, and staff adapted care when people's needs changed.
“People received care that was personalised.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People had regular opportunities for activities and were supported to maintain interests, pets and contact with family and friends.
“People were supported to participate in their chosen social and leisure interests on a regular basis.” from the report
Good management oversight
Managers used meetings, audits and feedback to monitor the service and make improvements.
“Quality checks and audits made a positive difference.” from the report
End-of-life plans
needs fixingSome people did not have sufficiently detailed plans about the care they might need at the end of life. Inspectors recommended reviewing the planning process.
“Not all the people living at the service had sufficiently detailed care plans around the support they might need at the end of life.” from the report
Personal preferences not always recorded
minorSome cultural and other personal preferences were not fully written into care plans. Inspectors discussed this with the manager so staff would have clear information if someone could no longer explain their wishes.
“Some people's individual preferences, such as cultural requirements, were not fully recorded in care plans.” from the report
Some medicines plans lacked detail
needs fixingA few plans for medicines taken when needed were not detailed enough. Senior staff had already identified the gaps and planned actions to address them.
“Although some of these plans lacked detail, we found staff were knowledgeable in this area.” from the report
Patterned carpets
needs fixingSome carpets had strong patterns that could disorientate people or increase falls risk for people with perception problems. A new plain carpet had been fitted in the dementia unit, with further changes planned.
“The carpets in some of the service had very strong patterns.” from the report
- 01The report names Signature at The Beeches rather than Brentwood Arches Care Home. Can you confirm which service this report applies to?
- 02How do you now record people's wishes and preferences for end-of-life care?
- 03Have all residents who may need palliative or end-of-life care had their plans reviewed and completed?
- 04Have the medicines plans that lacked detail been updated?
- 05Have the remaining strongly patterned carpets been replaced, particularly in areas used by people living with dementia?
This was a full planned inspection of the home named in the report, covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control, but the supplied service name does not match the report name. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 May 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 Brentwood Arches Care Home
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 March 2021.
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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.