CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Burrow Down Shortbreaks
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, October 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised short-break care with strong support for independence.
This was the first inspection since the home registered. Inspectors visited on 05 October 2021 and 12 October 2021. They spoke with people using the service, staff, families and health professionals, and checked care plans, training, recruitment, safety and quality records.
The home supported up to six people with learning disabilities, autism and related needs. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines support, good infection control and well-managed risks. People were treated with dignity and supported to make choices, communicate and become more independent.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The report says this meant people's outcomes were consistently good and the service was consistently managed. This was a planned inspection, and there was no previous rating because it was the first inspection.
Promoting independence
Independence was a central part of the home's approach. Families and health professionals described people becoming more confident and able to do more for themselves.
“Encouraging independence was at the heart of the culture at Lynwood Lodge, and people were treated with dignity and respect.” from the report
Detailed personal care plans
Care plans explained people's needs, choices, communication methods, triggers and goals in detail. People were involved in developing their plans.
“People's care plans were extremely detailed, and people were involved in developing them.” from the report
Managing risks
The home assessed risks such as falls, choking and behaviours that could cause harm. Staff used positive and practical approaches to reduce these risks.
“Risks to people were assessed, monitored and managed well.” from the report
Activities and community access
People took part in activities they enjoyed, including outings, cooking, crafts and painting. Activities also helped people develop skills and avoid social isolation.
“People were supported in line with their individual needs and choices and were encouraged to avoid social isolation.” from the report
Open communication
The home worked closely with families and health professionals. Inspectors were told that information was shared honestly and promptly.
“They are honest and transparent and share information well.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you keep my relative's care plan up to date and make sure new staff read it before supporting them?
- 02What one-to-one staffing level would my relative receive, and how would this change depending on their needs?
- 03How would you support my relative's particular way of communicating, especially when they are distressed or unable to explain what they need?
- 04Which activities and community outings could my relative take part in, and how would you adapt them to their interests and risks?
- 05What progress has been made with the planned bedroom and bathroom developments, including the larger wet room?
This was the first planned comprehensive inspection and covered all five ratings, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 October 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, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection-control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The inspection took place on 18 February 2021. It was announced and focused only on infection prevention and control in response to the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found systems to reduce the risk of COVID-19 spreading. Visitors were screened, tested, asked to use protective equipment and follow social distancing. Staff had suitable protective equipment and infection-control training.
The home carried out regular staff testing and health checks for people using the service. Its COVID-19 policies had been updated in line with current guidance.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give a quality rating for the home overall or for the five key questions.
Visitor safety checks
Visitors were screened before entry and were required to follow protective equipment and social distancing guidance.
“Visitors were asked to consent to a rapid COVID-19 test, have their temperature checked, wash their hands and were screened for any symptoms of COVID-19” from the report
Protective equipment and training
The home had enough protective equipment. Staff were observed using it correctly and had received infection-control training.
“The service had sufficient stocks of PPE available and staff were observed to use PPE within national guidance.” from the report
Updated infection policies
The home had COVID-19 policies and procedures, which were reviewed and updated when needed.
“The provider had developed specific COVID-19 policies and procedures, which had been reviewed and updated where necessary in line with the latest guidance.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection-control arrangements are in place now, and how have they changed since the inspection?
- 02How are visitors currently screened and asked to follow infection-control measures?
- 03How often do staff receive infection-control training, and how is their practice checked?
- 04How are people using the service health-screened, and what happens if someone becomes unwell?
- 05How does the home prevent and manage an infection outbreak?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated overall or for the other key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 March 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 Burrow Down Shortbreaks
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- October 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 February 2020.
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
21 live-in carers within about an hour of Torbay
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 £1,400 a week. 17 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
“She was not phased by anything, she was adaptable, kind & gave us complete confidence to go away & not worry about a thing!”
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.