CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Brun Lea Care
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment checks, suitable risk assessments and safe medicines systems. Staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns and incidents were reviewed to reduce the risk of repetition.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and support. People's eating, drinking, weight and health needs were monitored, and the home worked well with healthcare professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were offered choices about meals, activities, where they spent time and when they got up or went to bed.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised, regularly reviewed and understood by staff. Activities reflected people's interests, and one-to-one activities were available for people who spent more time in their rooms.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a registered manager, effective quality checks and systems for gathering people's and staff's views. Inspectors found that action had been taken to address concerns from the previous inspection.
What inspectors found, June 2019
Brun Lea Care was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with improvements since the previous Requires Improvement rating.
This was an unannounced, planned inspection on 18 March 2019. Inspectors observed care, spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment files and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practices, suitable risk assessments, trained staff and good links with healthcare professionals.
People were involved in their care and daily choices. Care plans reflected people's needs, activities were provided, and end-of-life wishes were recorded and respected. Staff were described as kind, respectful and familiar with people's individual needs.
The previous inspection had rated the home Requires Improvement. Inspectors found that the provider and manager had made the necessary improvements, including making the environment more suitable for people living with dementia and improving management visibility.
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were sufficient for people's needs, with no undue waiting for care.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs without them having to wait for care.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff focused on people as individuals and offered support in a warm and respectful way.
“At this inspection we found that the focus of care had moved to the individual.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans were clear, regularly updated and matched people's needs. Staff could explain the care people required.
“Care plans were neat and well-ordered and information was easy to find.” from the report
Good communication support
The home used picture menus and other communication aids to help people living with dementia make choices and express how they felt.
“The menu was available in a picture format to help people living with dementia.” from the report
Improvements since the last inspection
The provider had acted on earlier concerns, including improving signs and making the home more suitable for people living with dementia.
“At this inspection we found that the provider had made changes to improve the environment.” from the report
Planned carpet replacement
minorThe home had plans to replace corridor carpets. Families may wish to check whether this work has since been completed.
“Plans were in place to replace the carpets in the corridors.” from the report
- 01Have the corridor carpets been replaced, and are there any other environmental improvements still outstanding?
- 02How will you assess and support my relative's eating, drinking and ability to maintain a healthy weight?
- 03How will my relative's communication needs and choices be recorded and shared with staff?
- 04What activities would be available if my relative preferred to spend time in their room?
- 05How would you involve our family in decisions about care, capacity and end-of-life wishes?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the home, with improvements checked against the previous Requires Improvement rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 June 2019 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, February 2018
Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe and responsive care, but personalisation, dementia-friendly surroundings and management needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection over two days. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff recruitment files and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Responsive. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, suitable risk assessments and good access to health care. Care plans were accurate, activities were provided and end-of-life wishes were recorded.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Effective, Caring and Well-led. Staff could become focused on completing tasks rather than asking what people wanted. The environment was not fully suitable for people living with dementia, pureed meals were not presented well, and the manager was not very visible because they also managed another home.
This was the second consecutive Requires Improvement rating. The report says improvements had been made in Safe and Responsive, but more work was needed in the other three areas.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe, and inspectors found that risks were identified and care was planned to reduce them. Staffing levels were monitored and increased when needed.
“There were enough staff to keep people safe and recruitment processes ensured staff were safe to work with people living at the home.” from the report
Safe medicines and infection control
Medicines were administered and recorded safely overall. The home was clean, and staff understood how to reduce infection risks.
“We found that suitable arrangements were in place to safely order, administer and dispose of people's medicines in line with national guidelines.” from the report
Accurate care planning
Care plans contained accurate information about people's needs and were reviewed monthly or when needs changed. Staff also coordinated information when people moved between services.
“The care plans accurately recorded the care that people needed.” from the report
End-of-life support
People's wishes for the end of their lives were recorded. The home worked with health professionals to help keep people comfortable and pain free.
“People's wishes for the end of their lives were recorded and respected.” from the report
Care was sometimes task-focused
needs fixingStaff did not always ask people what they wanted during personal care, meals or daily routines. This meant care was not consistently centred on individual preferences.
“Staff at times focused of the tasked to be completed instead of ensuring that the care supported individual needs.” from the report
Dementia-friendly environment
needs fixingThe layout, signs, patterned carpets and garden did not fully support independence for people living with dementia. Some furniture was worn and wardrobes had not been fixed to the wall.
“The environment did not fully support people living with dementia.” from the report
Pureed food presentation
needs fixingPureed meals were prepared to a safe consistency, but different foods were mixed into one brown puree. This reduced people's ability to distinguish flavours and choose what to eat.
“However, all the meal was pureed into one unappetising brown puree.” from the report
Limited manager visibility
needs fixingThe manager divided their time between two homes. People and relatives were not always sure who the manager was and usually spoke with the head of care instead.
“However, this had impacted on the manager's visibility within the home.” from the report
Bed rail guidance
seriousInspectors found that best practice for the safe use of bed rails had not been followed. The concern was discussed with the manager, who agreed to take action.
“However, the best practice guidelines for the safe use of bed rails had not been followed.” from the report
- 01What has changed to make care less task-focused and more based on each person's choices?
- 02What improvements have been made to the signs, carpets, garden and other parts of the home for people living with dementia?
- 03How are pureed meals now presented so that people can identify different foods and choose what they want?
- 04How often is the registered manager now present at the home, and who is responsible when they are away?
- 05What action was taken after inspectors raised the unsafe use of bed rails?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall quality and safety of the home; the report gives the visit dates as 16 and 17 November 2017, although one summary line refers to September 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 February 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 Brun Lea Care
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2019Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
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 23 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Lincolnshire
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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.