CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Brighstone Grange
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks, including visitor checks, PPE, testing, social distancing and outbreak prevention. The provider also said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Targeted inspection; inspectors were assured about infection control and visiting arrangements, but the service was not rated.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 14 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures were affecting the home.
Inspectors found good infection control arrangements. These included visitor checks, testing, personal protective equipment, staff training, updated guidance, and processes for safe visits. They were also assured that the provider had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
The home was inspected but not rated overall. The Safe question was also inspected but not rated. This report therefore gives information about infection control and visiting at that time, rather than a full assessment of the home.
Infection control
The home had an up-to-date infection prevention and control policy. Staff received training and updates when government guidance changed.
“Staff had received IPC training and there was an up to date infection prevention and control (IPC) policy.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors were asked to complete checks before entering, including a lateral flow test, health questionnaire and temperature check.
“There was a robust process in place to ensure visitors were asked to consent to a lateral flow test (LFT), complete a health questionnaire and have their temperatures” from the report
Safe visiting arrangements
Relatives could visit by booking in advance. The home had processes to support visits in line with government guidance and to clean the areas before and afterwards.
“People's relatives were able to visit by booking in advance, so that staff could safely support visits, and the areas could be cleaned prior to and following the visit.” from the report
Staff wellbeing
The provider recognised the effect of the pandemic on staff wellbeing and arranged access to individual support from an external professional.
“Staff were supported by the provider who had recognised the impact of the pandemic on their wellbeing and had arranged for an external professional to provide individual support for staff if they wanted it.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently manage visitor checks, testing and health screening?
- 02What are the current arrangements for relatives to book visits, and how are visiting areas cleaned?
- 03How do you manage staffing pressures if COVID-19 affects staff availability?
- 04How often are staff trained and updated on infection prevention and control guidance?
- 05What are the home's current processes for testing, PPE and managing any infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it was not a full service assessment and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 February 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, January 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but medicines were not always stored at the correct temperature.
This was an unannounced inspection on 31 October and 7 November 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines, staff records, complaints, accidents and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable training, respectful care, personalised support, activities and good links with health professionals.
There were some issues to improve. Medicines were sometimes stored above the recommended temperature. Some risk records were out of date at the start of the inspection, and emergency evacuation plans were not easy to access. The risk records were updated during the inspection.
Kind and respectful care
Staff developed warm relationships with people and protected their dignity and privacy during personal care.
“People were cared for with dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, backgrounds, medical conditions and behaviours. Staff knew the people they supported.
“People experienced care and support from staff who were knowledgeable about their needs and the things that were important to them in their lives.” from the report
Staffing and training
Inspectors found enough staff, appropriate recruitment checks, induction, ongoing training and supervision.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs and to enable them to engage with people in a relaxed and unhurried manner.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to take part in activities that suited their interests and abilities, while choices not to join in were respected.
“People's wellbeing was enhanced through activities that were focused on individual's abilities and preferences.” from the report
Medicine storage temperature
needs fixingMedicine storage temperatures were above the manufacturer's recommended limit on several occasions. The provider was advised to seek further advice about safe storage.
“People's medicines were not always stored at the correct temperature.” from the report
Risk records needed updating
needs fixingSome risk records were not up to date when inspectors first checked them. The records were updated and personalised by the end of the inspection.
“However, we found some records in respect of people's risks were not up to date.” from the report
Emergency plans were not easy to access
needs fixingPersonal evacuation plans were available in care plans but could not be accessed easily in an emergency. The manager agreed they should be kept in a fire grab bag.
“Personal evacuation plans for people were available in people's care plans, however these were not easily assessable in an emergency.” from the report
- 01How do you now check and record that medicines are stored at the correct temperature?
- 02Have the personal evacuation plans been moved into an easily accessible fire grab bag?
- 03How often are each person's care plan and risk assessments reviewed and updated?
- 04How will my relative and our family be involved in creating and reviewing their personalised care plan?
- 05What activities would be available for my relative, and how would you support them if they preferred not to join in?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, including the care home and the newly started community care service known as 'the hub'. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 January 2018 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 Brighstone Grange
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 October 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
84 live-in carers within about two hours of Isle of Wight
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 £1,010 to £1,230 a week. 68 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.