CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Buckfield House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff managed risks, medicines, records, incidents and infection prevention safely, although the home was working to reduce its use of agency staff.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff assessed people's health and support needs, had relevant training and supported people with food, healthcare and decision-making. Care plans reflected communication and sensory needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- People received kind and compassionate care. Staff respected privacy, dignity, equality, communication preferences and personal choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support was personalised to people's needs, communication styles, relationships and interests. People and their families could raise concerns, and the provider investigated complaints and shared learning.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The registered manager and staff understood people's needs and used effective checks to oversee care. People, families and staff were involved in developing the service.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some reliance on agency staff.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 07 March 2022. One inspector observed care, spoke with staff and relatives, and reviewed care plans, medicine records, staff files and management records. The inspection also considered infection prevention and control.
The home supported five people in a building designed for six. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and dignity, and supported to make choices and live as independently as possible. Staff understood people's communication needs, supported activities and interests, and worked with health and social care professionals.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the first inspection under new ownership, and all five ratings remained Good compared with the previous inspection.
Choice and independence
Staff focused on what people could do and supported them to have choice, control and independence in daily life.
“The staff supported people to have the maximum possible choice, control and independence be independent and they had control over their own lives.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found staff were patient, calm and attentive to people's emotions, sensory needs, privacy and dignity.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Communication support
Staff understood different ways people communicated, including body language, sounds, signs, pictures and symbols.
“People who had individual ways of communicating, using body language, sounds, Makaton (a form of sign language), pictures and symbols could interact comfortably with staff” from the report
Activities and community links
People were supported to pursue personal interests, try new activities and access support and services in the community.
“Staff supported people to take part in activities and pursue their interests in their local area” from the report
Management oversight
Inspectors found that governance systems helped managers monitor care, protect people's rights and identify improvements.
“Governance processes were effective and helped to hold staff to account, keep people safe, protect people's rights and provide good quality care and support” from the report
Use of agency staff
minorRecruitment had been difficult during the COVID-19 pandemic. The manager was recruiting permanent staff to improve consistency, and a relative said they would like to see less agency staff used.
“Permanent staff are very good, but I would like to see less agency staff used.” from the report
Planned refurbishment
minorThe home was about to start refurbishment, including a new kitchen and flooring. Families may want to ask how this will be managed around people's needs.
“The registered manager told us the provider was about to start a refurbishment programme to enhance the home environment further.” from the report
- 01How many permanent staff currently work at the home, and how often are agency staff used now?
- 02How will new or agency staff learn each person's communication, sensory and support needs?
- 03What is the timetable for the planned refurbishment, and how will disruption be reduced for residents?
- 04How will the home continue to support each person's activities, interests and access to the local community?
- 05How will families be involved in reviewing care plans and developing the service?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control, and was carried out after a change of ownership. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 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, January 2020
Buckfield House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with care records that needed to be easier to use.
This was an unannounced inspection by two inspectors on 10 December 2019. They observed care in communal areas, spoke with staff, managers, directors, relatives and health and social care professionals, and reviewed care, medicines and management records.
The inspectors found that people were safe and comfortable. There were enough staff, medicines were managed safely, risks were understood, and the home was clean. People received support suited to their health needs and were helped to make choices.
Staff were kind and respectful. People were supported to keep in touch with family, follow their interests and take part in activities such as horse riding and swimming. The managers were visible and the service had an open culture.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published on 13 June 2017. Inspectors did identify that care records were difficult to navigate and were due for review.
People felt safe
People appeared relaxed and comfortable. Relatives said their family members were safe and settled.
“People looked relaxed and comfortable in their home environment.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Inspectors found that medicines were given as needed and handled using safe procedures.
“People were receiving their medicines when they should. The provider was following safe protocols for the receipt, storage, administration and disposal of medicines.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated people with kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, and listened to their choices.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were supported to follow their own interests, go out and stay connected with family and friends.
“All people living in the home enjoyed going out and undertook activities that were tailored for them.” from the report
Open management
Managers and staff worked together and welcomed suggestions from people, relatives and professionals.
“The culture of the service was open and transparent.” from the report
Care records were hard to navigate
needs fixingInspectors found that records did not clearly show people's current care and support needs. The managers had identified this and planned a complete review.
“care records were difficult to navigate to clearly identify people's current care and support needs.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the care records since the inspection, and how quickly can staff find my relative's current needs?
- 02How will you support my relative's individual communication needs, including the use of pictorial cards or other communication aids?
- 03How will you involve my relative and our family in reviewing care when their needs or health change?
- 04Which activities and community opportunities could be offered to my relative, and how would you manage any risks involved?
- 05How will you make sure medicines, health appointments and advice from health professionals are recorded and followed?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the previous Good ratings for each question carried forward as the comparison. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 January 2020 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 Buckfield House
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 January 2011.
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
11 live-in carers within about an hour of Herefordshire, County of
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 £960 to £1,410 a week. 10 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.