CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Broad Oak Manor Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Broad Oak Manor Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and visiting arrangements.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 9 February 2022. It was a targeted inspection during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on infection prevention, visiting arrangements and the effect of staffing pressures.
Inspectors found the home was clean and had up-to-date cleaning schedules. Shared equipment was disinfected after use. There was enough personal protective equipment, regular COVID-19 testing and training in infection control.
Visiting was supported under the guidance in force at the time. Visitors were given protective equipment, tested on arrival and able to visit people in their rooms. A screened visitor pod was also available.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not provide an overall quality rating or ratings for most of the five areas inspectors usually assess.
Clean environment
The home had up-to-date cleaning schedules and extra cleaning for frequently touched areas. Shared equipment was disinfected after each use.
“The service was clean; there were up to date cleaning schedules in place and additional cleaning for frequently touched areas, such as door handles.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
Visitors were tested, given protective equipment and able to visit people in their rooms. A screened visitor pod was available when needed.
“Visitors were given personal protective equipment (PPE) for use during their visit, were tested for COVID-19 on the day of the visit, signed a health declaration and visited their loved ones in their rooms.” from the report
Infection control
The home had enough protective equipment, regular testing and staff training in infection control. Infection control audits and spot checks were up to date.
“Infection control audits and spot checks were undertaken regularly and were up to date.” from the report
Safe admissions and testing
Inspectors were assured that people were admitted safely and that testing was carried out for people living in the home and staff.
“People were admitted safely into the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do your current visiting arrangements compare with those described in the February 2022 report?
- 02How do you currently manage staffing pressures, and have they affected people's care or routines?
- 03Are infection control audits, spot checks, cleaning schedules and equipment cleaning still carried out as described in the report?
- 04Is the visitor pod still available, and when would families be asked to use it?
- 05What full inspection ratings does the home currently have for Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not covered. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 March 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, June 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but daily food and fluid records were not always complete.
Inspectors visited on 16 and 18 May 2017 without notice. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff files, audits, rotas and policies.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and individual risks, with enough staff and suitable recruitment checks. Staff training, healthcare support and medicines arrangements were also generally effective.
People and relatives described kind and respectful care. Staff knew people's preferences and supported their choices, activities and independence. The home had regular meetings, surveys and quality checks, and managers acted quickly when inspectors found problems.
There were some shortfalls. Food and fluid charts, and records of people's position changes, were not always completed consistently. Inspectors also noted that some carpets and colour changes in the environment might increase the risk of falls. The home remained Good, as it had been at the previous inspection in February 2015.
Protection from harm
Staff understood safeguarding procedures and their responsibilities. Individual risks, including falls and pressure sores, had care plans and guidance for staff.
“People continued to be protected from abuse or harm.” from the report
Kind and personal care
People and relatives described staff as kind and respectful. Staff knew people's personal preferences and supported dignity and independence.
“Staff knew people well and were able to give examples of peoples' personal preferences.” from the report
Activities and involvement
The home offered group activities, outings and one-to-one visits. Residents' meetings helped people influence the activities programme.
“People had access to a range of activities.” from the report
Active management
Managers used regular meetings and audits to check the service. They responded promptly to issues identified during the inspection.
“The provider and registered manager continued to take the quality and safety of the service seriously by having effective processes in place to monitor systems.” from the report
Incomplete daily records
needs fixingFood and fluid charts were not always recorded consistently, even when inspectors saw drinks being offered and taken. Records of changes to people's position in bed were also not always consistent.
“Daily food and fluid charts were not consistently recorded.” from the report
Flooring and visual contrast
minorInspectors said some changes between floor or carpet colours could be perceived as steps, which might increase the risk of falls. The provider had approved new carpets, but the report does not confirm that replacement was completed.
“Although the service was clean and well decorated, the décor and carpets were not the most appropriate for older people or those living with dementia.” from the report
- 01What checks are now made to ensure food and fluid charts are completed every time?
- 02How do you record and monitor repositioning for people who need regular changes of position?
- 03Have the carpets been replaced, and what changes have been made to reduce confusion about floor colours?
- 04What was the result of the new monitoring process for daily charts after the inspection?
- 05How are people's food, fluid and specialist dietary needs reviewed with nurses, dieticians or Speech and Language Therapists?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and all five ratings were given as Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 June 2017 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 Broad Oak Manor Care Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 2010.
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.