CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Broomhill Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, assessed risks and safe medicines arrangements. Infection prevention and control measures were also in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before they moved in. Staff had relevant training and support, and people could access healthcare and food and drink suited to their preferences.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff knew people's needs and preferences and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect. People were supported to make choices and maintain their independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People had activities, support to keep in touch with family and friends, accessible information and a complaints process.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers were described as approachable and supportive. The home used meetings, surveys and audits to monitor care and seek improvements.
What inspectors found, November 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no breaches reported.
The home provides accommodation and personal care for up to eight adults with a learning disability and/or autistic people. Six people were living there when inspectors visited on 20 October 2021.
One inspector spoke with people, relatives, managers and staff. They also observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staff files, surveys, audits and policies. Some people could not speak with the inspector, so care was also observed using a structured method.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were offered choices, treated with dignity, supported to be independent, and given care that reflected their needs and preferences.
The home had enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable infection control measures and appropriate links with health professionals. There were systems for complaints, feedback and quality checks. The previous rating was also Good, published on 29 November 2017, although the provider's legal entity had changed.
Choice and dignity
People were offered choices suited to their understanding and needs. Inspectors found that care promoted dignity, privacy and human rights.
“People were given choices which were appropriate to their needs and level of understanding and ability.” from the report
Enough staff
Staffing levels were monitored according to people's changing needs, including when someone needed support to attend a hospital appointment.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs and to provide personalised care and support.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff competency was checked and medicines records inspected by CQC were complete, with no gaps in signatures.
“Medicines administration records (MAR) we looked at, were all signed appropriately and there were no gaps in signatures.” from the report
Promoting independence
People were encouraged to do things for themselves and to take part in household tasks and other independent living activities.
“People were helped by the staff to maintain their independence wherever possible.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The manager used audits, meetings and feedback from people, relatives and staff to monitor the service and look for improvements.
“The registered manager undertook regular audits to monitor the quality of the service they provided.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you support my relative's particular communication needs, including whether they need information in picture format?
- 02How would you adjust staffing if my relative needed support with a hospital appointment or another community activity?
- 03How are my relative's care plans and risk assessments reviewed when their needs or preferences change?
- 04What activities would be available that match my relative's interests, and how would you support contact with family and friends?
- 05How can my relative or our family raise a complaint, and how would the home use it to improve care?
This was a planned inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe; the previous Good rating was published in 2017 before the provider's legal entity changed. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 November 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 Broomhill Lodge
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- November 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 February 2019.
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 Redbridge
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 £1,250 a week. 75 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Sidonia is a first class live-in carer whose dedication and thoughtfulness made her stay a happy experience.”
“Charity would take Nan on holidays day trips and shopping adventures”
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.