CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Burntwood Hall Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were in place. This included PPE, testing, safe admissions, social distancing, cleaning and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Burntwood Hall Care Centre had assured infection control arrangements, but this targeted inspection did not give an overall rating.
Inspectors visited on 20 January 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. They looked at infection prevention and control measures in the home.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks. This included safe admissions, use of protective equipment, testing, social distancing, cleaning, visiting arrangements and plans for managing outbreaks.
The home supported window visits using telephones and a Perspex screen. It also had plans for in-home visits after residents received COVID-19 vaccinations, and supported visits for people receiving end of life care.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report gives no overall quality rating and does not assess all five areas of care.
Safer visiting
The home provided equipment and carried out checks to support window visits safely. It also had risk assessments for visits.
“The service had provided telephones and a Perspex screen to support safe unrestricted window visits.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely and had arrangements for testing, hygiene and preventing or managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Safe admissions
The home followed procedures for admitting people during the pandemic, including testing before admission.
“The home followed guidelines to safely admit people to the home.” from the report
Staff training
Staff received extra training and infection prevention and control testing during the pandemic.
“Staff received additional training about the Covid-19 pandemic and additional infection prevention and control testing.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now, including PPE, testing, cleaning and outbreak management?
- 02How are visits currently arranged, including visits for people receiving end of life care?
- 03What arrangements are in place for in-home visits?
- 04What checks and testing are carried out before someone is admitted to the home?
- 05What extra infection prevention and control training do staff receive now?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not assess all five key questions or give an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 February 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.
What inspectors found, April 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with some concerns about rushed staff, activities and overdue appraisals.
This was an unannounced inspection on 28 February 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, visitors and staff. They reviewed care records, staff files and management records, and observed daily life.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found safe medicines systems, suitable staffing overall, trained staff, respectful care, support with food and health needs, and managers who listened and checked the quality of care.
There were some smaller shortfalls. People and relatives said staff could seem rushed at times. Some staff appraisals were overdue, the activities boards were blank while a replacement activity coordinator was being recruited, and there was a faint smell on one corridor. Inspectors also found that information about one as-needed medicine was not clear, but this was updated immediately.
The home was rated Good at its previous inspection, published on 3 September 2016, and remained Good at this inspection. This means the inspectors found that legal requirements were met and that people's outcomes were consistently good.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about the staff. Inspectors saw patient, caring interactions and found that privacy and dignity were respected.
“We saw positive, caring interactions between people and staff throughout the day of the inspection.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Medicines were stored securely, staff were trained and their competence was checked. The ten medication records inspected were complete.
“Medicines were stored safely and securely. There were effective systems in place to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Support with food and health
People were offered choices of food and drinks, with support for dietary needs. Staff helped people access health professionals and updated care records after visits.
“A member of staff sat at each table to eat lunch with people after every person had been served.” from the report
Good staff support and oversight
Staff received induction, yearly mandatory training and regular supervision. The home had audits, updated policies and systems for acting on problems.
“The service had effective quality assurance audits in place.” from the report
People's views were sought
The home held meetings and surveys for people, relatives and staff. Inspectors found evidence that people's views and needs were considered.
“Residents and relatives' meetings were also held every three months.” from the report
Staff sometimes seemed rushed
needs fixingSome people and relatives said staff could appear rushed, including a comment about occasional short staffing at weekends. The deputy manager said staffing levels were adjusted when people's needs or occupancy changed.
“Some people did tell us staff could appear rushed on occasion.” from the report
Activities information was not up to date
needs fixingThe activities boards were blank while the activity coordinator had moved to another post and a replacement was being recruited. People still had access to some activities, visits and outdoor areas.
“However, the activities boards were blank, there were no forthcoming activities listed.” from the report
Some appraisals were overdue
needs fixingThe staff records reviewed showed that annual appraisals had not always taken place on time. The deputy manager had plans to complete them.
“We saw these had not always taken place every year, meaning some were overdue.” from the report
A faint smell on one corridor
minorInspectors noticed a faint malodour on the first-floor corridor. Managers were taking action, including buying specialist cleaning solutions.
“We noticed a faint malodour on a corridor on the first floor.” from the report
Minor concerns were not always recorded
minorThe deputy manager recorded formal complaints but did not record some minor issues dealt with at the time. Inspectors suggested recording these as well.
“We suggested the deputy manager may want to consider recording these minor issues as well.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure staff are not rushed, especially at weekends?
- 02Who is currently responsible for activities, and what regular activities are now available?
- 03Have all staff appraisals that were overdue at the inspection now been completed?
- 04How do you record and review minor concerns that are dealt with informally?
- 05What action was taken to resolve the faint smell on the first-floor corridor?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the home remained Good in each area. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 April 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.
Every inspection of Burntwood Hall Care Centre
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 December 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
At least 99 live-in carers within about an hour of Barnsley
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. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Ivy was very kind and gentle in all her dealings with my late mother. They got on very well and were able to share a joke and a laugh.”
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.