CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 15 Brooklyn Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that medicines, staffing, risk management and infection control were handled safely. Accidents and incidents were reviewed, and lessons were shared with staff.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. No areas of concern were identified in the information held, and the previous rating was carried forward.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. No areas of concern were identified in the information held, and the previous rating was carried forward.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. No areas of concern were identified in the information held, and the previous rating was carried forward.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found regular audits, clearer management responsibilities and an open culture. The provider had addressed the earlier weakness in quality assurance and was no longer in breach of Regulation 17.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe care and stronger management systems, with the service improved from Requires Improvement.
The inspection took place on 23 September 2020 and included a visit and later checks of records. The inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional. They looked at the building, care and medicines records, staff files, rotas, incidents and management audits.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found that people received their medicines safely, risks were monitored, staffing was safe and infection control procedures were being followed. The home was clean and refurbishment work was completed or planned where needed.
The provider had improved its quality checks since the previous inspection. The last report, published in October 2019, rated the service Requires Improvement and found a breach of Regulation 17. At this inspection, the breach had been addressed and the overall rating improved to Good.
This was a focused inspection. Inspectors did not inspect Effective, Caring or Responsive because they found no information suggesting concerns in those areas. Their previous ratings for those questions were used in calculating the overall rating.
Safer quality checks
The home had introduced regular checks covering infection control, health and safety, medicines and care plans. Actions identified through these checks were completed promptly.
“The registered manager and provider completed regular audits and checks of the service.” from the report
Safe medicines
Inspectors found that medicines were stored, recorded and given correctly. Staff had medicines training and their competence was checked.
“People received their medicines as prescribed. Medicines were stored, recorded and administered appropriately.” from the report
Staffing and familiar support
The home was fully staffed and inspectors found there were enough staff on duty. Some staff had worked there for a long time, helping people receive support from familiar workers.
“A safe number of staff were on duty.” from the report
Infection control
Cleaning had improved and staff were observed following government guidance about COVID-19 during the visit.
“We were assured the service were following safe infection prevention and control procedures to keep people safe.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What refurbishment work is still needed, and when will it be completed?
- 02How often are medicines, infection control and care plan audits completed, and can you explain any actions still open?
- 03How do you make sure staffing levels remain safe when people need support in the community?
- 04How are changes in people's risks, health needs or behaviour recorded and shared with staff?
- 05What were the previous ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive, and when will these areas next be fully inspected?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection control; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 November 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.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but concerns about cleanliness, records and management.
This was an unannounced inspection of the home. The inspector spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and health and social care professionals. Records about care, medicines, staffing and management were also checked.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Care plans were mostly personalised and people were supported to make choices, stay independent and keep in touch with relatives. The home had five residents at the time, with space for up to six.
Inspectors found problems with cleanliness, some health monitoring, staff training, care records and management oversight. There had also been a high turnover of managers and support staff. The home was rated Requires Improvement overall, with Good ratings for caring and responsiveness.
The previous overall rating was Good in 2016. Safe, effective and well-led all fell from Good to Requires Improvement. The provider was asked to send CQC an action plan, and CQC said it would check that improvements were made.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff interact calmly and gently. People were involved in decisions about their day and were treated with dignity.
“We observed staff talking to people, calmly and gently interacting.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's preferences, routines, communication needs and areas of independence. They had mostly been reviewed recently.
“Care plans were person centred and contained people's preferences, likes and dislikes.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, use communal areas and the garden, access the community and develop daily living skills.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Safeguarding awareness
Staff had safeguarding training and knew how to report concerns. Recruitment checks had been completed safely.
“Staff had received safeguarding training and were knowledgeable about their responsibility to report any concerns to their line manager.” from the report
Cleanliness and infection control
needs fixingSeveral areas were dirty or mouldy, and some equipment and hand-drying facilities were unsuitable. Cleaning audits had not found these problems.
“Some areas of the home were not clean which increased the risk of the spread of infection.” from the report
Frequent management changes
seriousThere had been six managers in 18 months and no registered manager was in place during the inspection. Professionals described the service as fragile.
“There had been six managers in 18 months and four locality managers.” from the report
Incomplete or outdated records
needs fixingSome care plans had not been signed as read by all staff. One epilepsy plan needed updating after treatment changes, and some health monitoring records were missing.
“Not all care plans had been signed as read by every member of staff.” from the report
Weak quality checks
seriousAudits did not identify important cleanliness problems and the service improvement plan was not on target. A required safeguarding notification had also not been sent to CQC at the time.
“The lack of robust, consistent management meant the providers service development plans had not been completed.” from the report
- 01What has been done to make sure the kitchen, bathrooms and communal areas are now cleaned and checked properly?
- 02Is there now a registered manager, and how long has the current management team been in post?
- 03How do you make sure every staff member reads and signs updated care plans, including epilepsy plans?
- 04How are health checks, such as weight monitoring and foot care, recorded and followed up?
- 05What action has been taken to reduce staff turnover and provide a stable staff team?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises, care, records, staffing and management. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 October 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 15 Brooklyn Road
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Gloucestershire
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 £1,030 to £1,360 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 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.