CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Buckler's Lodge Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, March 2023
Buckler's Lodge Care Home is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, personalised care but serious weaknesses in safeguarding, recruitment and management oversight.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 09 January 2023 and 10 January 2023. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines records, recruitment files and management records.
People generally described the care as kind and respectful. Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences. People had access to health professionals, activities and support to maintain relationships. Medicines and infection control were managed safely.
However, safeguarding incidents were not always fully investigated or reported to the right authorities. Recruitment checks were incomplete, and some people felt there were not enough staff. Management audits had failed to identify these problems. The home was in breach of three regulations, and CQC required an action plan and continued monitoring.
Personalised care
Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and daily routines. People and relatives were involved in planning care.
“Care plans were individualised and reflected people's current needs, preferences and daily routines.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives described staff as kind and respectful. Inspectors saw staff asking permission, knocking before entering rooms and offering choices.
“People told us staff were kind and caring.” from the report
Health support
Staff worked with health professionals and helped people attend health checks and appointments.
“Staff worked with professionals such as physiotherapists and specialists to support good outcomes for people.” from the report
Activities and relationships
The home offered activities seven days a week and supported people to spend time with relatives and avoid social isolation.
“The home employed 2 activities co-ordinators to ensure that there was an activity co-ordinator present seven days a week.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were stored securely, given as prescribed and recorded accurately. Staff had training and competency checks.
“People received their medicines as prescribed and the service had safe medicine storage systems in place.” from the report
Safeguarding investigations
seriousSafeguarding incidents were not always reported to all the appropriate authorities or investigated fully. This left people at continued risk of harm.
“Incidents were not always investigated thoroughly and action plans to mitigate the risk or reoccurrences were not always completed.” from the report
Recruitment checks
seriousThe recruitment records checked did not contain all the required evidence about previous employment and conduct. This could put people at risk of being supported by unsuitable staff.
“None of these included verification of reason for staff leaving their previous roles.” from the report
Staffing levels
needs fixingSome people said there were not enough staff and that care sometimes took longer. The provider was recruiting and using agency staff to cover absences.
“They're so busy and so understaffed that things sometimes take longer.” from the report
Management oversight
seriousAudits and governance systems did not identify important problems with safeguarding, recruitment and incidents. Staff also reported that important information was not always shared.
“The registered manager had failed to implement effective governance systems.” from the report
Safety records
needs fixingThe gas safety certificate had expired before the inspection, and one person's emergency evacuation plan had not been updated after their mobility changed. The plan was updated during the inspection and the certificate was completed shortly afterwards.
“The service's gas safety certificate had expired on 18 August 2022.” from the report
Care plan reviews
minorCare plans were not always reviewed monthly as stated in people's records. The registered manager said this would be addressed.
“Care plans were not always reviewed monthly as indicated in people's care files.” from the report
- 01What has changed in the way safeguarding incidents are reported, investigated and followed up?
- 02How do you now check previous employment and conduct before appointing staff?
- 03How do you assess staffing levels against the needs of people living here, including during staff absences?
- 04How are important changes and risks shared with staff during handovers?
- 05How do you make sure care plans and emergency evacuation plans are reviewed when people's needs change?
This was an unannounced first full inspection of the newly registered care home, covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 March 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.
Every inspection of Buckler's Lodge Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- March 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 February 2022.
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
81 live-in carers within about an hour of Bracknell Forest
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 £1,020 to £1,300 a week. 74 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult times.”
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at 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.