CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Brett Vale Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found effective safeguarding systems, regular risk reviews, enough safely recruited staff and safe medicines management. Infection control measures were also in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care was planned with their involvement. Staff had training and supervision, and people were supported with food, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were supported to make everyday choices and take part in decisions about their care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported to communicate, maintain relationships, access the community and follow their interests.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open, person-centred culture and good management oversight. Audits and reviews were used to monitor care and identify actions after incidents.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Brett Vale Residential Home is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with strong support for independence.
One inspector visited on 06 April 2022. They spoke with five people living there, five relatives, nine staff and two visiting professionals. They also reviewed care, medicines, staffing and management records.
The home supported nine adults with learning disabilities or autism. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines management and good infection control. People were supported to make choices, stay independent, access healthcare and take part in activities they enjoyed.
All five CQC areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means inspectors found the home was consistently meeting the standards they checked at this inspection.
Safety and staffing
Relatives said people were safe. Inspectors found enough staff, with gaps covered by regular bank staff rather than agency workers.
“There were enough, safely recruited staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's histories, preferences, routines and communication needs. This helped staff provide individual support.
“Support plans were detailed and contained important information about people's personal histories, their likes and dislikes, routines and preferences.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make everyday decisions, develop their abilities and take part in activities in the community and at home.
“People were supported to express their views and they and their relatives were involved in making decisions about their care and support wherever possible.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed positive interactions. Staff knew people well and supported privacy, dignity and independence.
“Interactions we observed were positive and respectful.” from the report
Activities and community access
People were supported to go shopping, visit places in the community and take part in activities matched to their interests.
“People were supported to access the community to participate in activities such as shopping, going to the pub and lunch out.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and update my relative's care plan and communication needs?
- 02How many staff would support my relative at different times, including for one-to-one or two-to-one support?
- 03What activities and community outings could my relative take part in based on their interests?
- 04What progress has been made with increasing the safe garden space and renovating the kitchen?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in decisions about care and changes in needs?
This inspection covered all five CQC questions and included infection prevention and control; it was the first inspection since a change to the home's registration in July 2020. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 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.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control, with some guidance given to develop the approach.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 4 December 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.
The home was clean and hygienic. Inspectors found enough PPE, saw staff using it correctly, and found that the layout supported social distancing. Staff had infection control training and their skills had been checked.
Inspectors were assured that the home managed visitors, admissions, testing, shielding, social distancing and infection outbreaks safely. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean, hygienic and free from unpleasant smells.
“The service was clean, hygienic and free of unpleasant odours throughout.” from the report
PPE and infection control training
Staff had relevant infection control training and their competence had been checked. Inspectors saw staff using PPE appropriately.
“Staff had received relevant training in infection control and prevention and had their competencies assessed in this area.” from the report
Social distancing arrangements
The environment had been organised to support social distancing, including a separate staff changing area and laundry facilities.
“The environment was well organised and had been adapted to support social distancing.” from the report
Risk assessments
Individual risks had been assessed with people using the service or their representatives, and control measures were put in place where needed.
“Individual risk assessments had been conducted in consultation with people who used the service and or their representatives.” from the report
Infection control procedures
The home had infection control policies based on current government guidance and inspectors found they had been put into practice.
“The provider had appropriate infection control policies and procedures in place.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its infection prevention and control approach. The report does not say that this led to a breach.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What changes, if any, did you make after inspectors signposted you to resources to develop your infection control approach?
- 02How are staff currently trained and checked on infection prevention and control and the safe use of PPE?
- 03How do you currently manage visitors and admissions to reduce the risk of infection?
- 04How do you access testing for residents and staff, and what happens if there is an outbreak?
- 05How are the home's layout, hygiene practices and staff changing arrangements being used to support infection control?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control within the Safe question only, and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 December 2020 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 Brett Vale Residential Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 July 2020.
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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Suffolk
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. 17 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
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.