CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Brinnington Hall
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and risks were assessed and managed. Medicines were generally managed safely, but records for thickener added to drinks were not always complete or up to date.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used in the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used in the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- This key question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used in the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the culture and felt able to raise concerns. The management team used feedback and was committed to improvement.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Brinnington Hall was rated Good; inspectors found safe, well-managed care, but thickener records needed improvement and staffing feedback was mixed.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 11 and 13 January 2023. Inspectors looked at Safe and Well-led because of concerns about medicines and routinely checked infection control. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Good for Well-led. Medicines were generally stored, given and recorded safely, risks were assessed, people felt safe, and infection control arrangements were suitable. However, staff did not always record when thickener had been added to drinks, and some information about quantities was not up to date.
Feedback about staffing was mixed. There were enough staff to meet people's needs on the inspection days, but some people, relatives and staff said there were not always enough staff, particularly at night. The management team was described as open to feedback and committed to improving the home.
Safe medicines systems
Inspectors found systems for storing, administering and using medicines safely. Covert medicines and medicines given when needed were managed with suitable instructions.
“The service had systems and processes in place for the safe storage, administration, and use of medicines.” from the report
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe. Risks were assessed, care plans were developed, and equipment and the environment were checked.
“People told us they felt safe living at Brinnington Hall.” from the report
Open culture
People, relatives and staff said they could share views and raise concerns. The home used meetings and surveys to make changes.
“People, relatives and staff all felt able to raise any issues.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The home investigated accidents, medication errors and safeguarding incidents. Inspectors saw evidence that lessons were shared and action was taken.
“The service investigated and analysed incidents where things had gone wrong to understand where lessons could be learnt.” from the report
Thickener records
needs fixingStaff did not always record when thickener was added to drinks. Information about the amount to use was not always up to date for two people, so inspectors recommended that these records be reviewed.
“staff did not always record when thickener powder had been added to drinks.” from the report
Mixed staffing feedback
minorThere were enough staff to meet people's needs on the inspection days, but some people, relatives and staff said staffing was not always sufficient. Night staff recruitment was ongoing and agency staff were used at night.
“However, we received mixed feedback about staffing levels.” from the report
- 01How do you now record when thickener is added to drinks?
- 02How do you check that the correct amount of thickener is used for each person?
- 03What is the current staffing level at night, and has night staff recruitment been completed?
- 04When agency staff work at night, how do you make sure they know people's needs and risks?
- 05What changes have been made since the inspection in response to the recommendation about thickener records?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the Effective, Caring and Responsive ratings were carried forward from the inspection published in 2019. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 February 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, June 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about the home's infection prevention and visiting arrangements.
This was a targeted, announced inspection on 25 May 2021. It looked at how the home was prepared to prevent and control COVID-19 infections.
Inspectors found the home was clean. Staff had training in using and disposing of personal protective equipment. Handwashing and PPE use were checked through regular audits, and high-touch areas were cleaned during the day.
People, visitors and staff were tested in line with government guidance. People who had COVID-19 had care plans and designated staff, with separate entrances used to reduce the risk of spreading the virus.
The inspection did not give an overall quality rating. The safe question was recorded as inspected but not rated, and the other four areas were not assessed in this report.
PPE and hygiene
Staff had training in safe PPE use. The home was clean, with extra cleaning of high-touch areas during the day.
“The home was clean throughout and additional cleaning of high touch areas completed throughout the day.” from the report
Safe visiting
Visitors were given information about the procedures to follow. A separate visiting area helped avoid unnecessary movement through the home.
“A designated area had been established which visitors could access without walking through the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are handwashing and PPE use checked now, and what did the most recent audits show?
- 02What happens if a resident tests positive for COVID-19, and which staff would provide their care?
- 03How are visitors currently tested, given information and admitted safely?
- 04How are residents kept in touch with relatives if face-to-face visits are restricted?
- 05What are the home's current overall and key question ratings from any later inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not provide a full overall rating or assess the other four key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 June 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.
Every inspection of Brinnington Hall
6 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- June 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 June 2014.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Stockport
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. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the 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.