CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oval House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and reviewed, medicines were managed safely, and there were enough suitably recruited staff. Infection prevention measures, including testing and PPE, were also in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Requires improvement
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found regular audits, action plans and support for staff. The home did not have a registered manager at the visit, although the manager had applied for registration.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Braunstone Firlands Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe care and strong monitoring, but there was no registered manager at the visit.
This was a focused inspection on 26 April 2021. Inspectors looked at Safe and Well-led, following concerns about nursing and personal care. They spoke with four family members and seven staff, and checked care plans, medicines records, recruitment files, audits and other records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Good for Well-led. Inspectors found that risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely, staffing and recruitment checks were suitable, and infection control measures were in place. Families described kind staff who understood people's needs and kept them informed.
The home had systems for monitoring quality, reviewing incidents and following up action plans. However, there was no registered manager at the time. The current manager had applied for registration, and not every family member remembered receiving feedback after consultation.
Risks were reviewed
People's health risks were assessed and care plans were updated when their needs changed. External health advice was sought when needed.
“Potential risks related to people's health were assessed and regularly reviewed and care records included the actions staff were to take to minimise risk and maximise people's health.” from the report
Safe medicines management
Records showed medicines were given at the right times, stored securely and checked through monthly audits.
“Records were kept of medicines prescribed for and given to people. These showed that people who used the service received their medicines at the times they needed them.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE effectively, arranged testing and had measures to prevent and manage infection outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider used audits, monitoring visits and action plans to check the service and follow up improvements.
“The provider had effective and comprehensive systems to monitor the performance of the service.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThe home did not have a manager registered with the CQC at the inspection. The manager had applied for registration, and the application was being processed.
“The service did not have a registered manager.” from the report
Feedback was not always reported back
minorFamilies' views were sought, but not everyone remembered receiving feedback after the consultation process.
“not everyone could remember receiving feedback following the consultation process.” from the report
- 01Has the manager's CQC registration application been completed, and who is legally responsible for the home now?
- 02How will you make sure families receive feedback after surveys and consultations?
- 03How are changes in a resident's health recorded and shared with their family?
- 04How often are medicines audits completed, and how are any problems followed up?
- 05How are staffing levels and staff competence checked when residents' needs change?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 May 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, August 2018
Braunstone Firlands Nursing Home is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care, but activities were not regular or personalised enough.
Inspectors visited on 13 and 21 June 2018. The first visit was unannounced and the second was announced. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, observed care, and checked care records, recruitment files, maintenance records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led were rated Good. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, medicines were handled safely, staff were trained, meals met people's needs, and staff treated people with kindness and respect.
Responsive was rated Requires Improvement. Activities had improved since the previous inspection, but they were not regular, well planned or personalised enough for everyone. Inspectors also found that people and relatives were not consistently involved in care plan reviews.
Safe medicines
Inspectors observed medicines being given safely and found that storage, timing, records and disposal were managed properly.
“We saw that medicines were stored safely, administered on time, recorded correctly and disposed of appropriately.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated people with kindness and dignity. They asked permission before care, offered choices and responded calmly when people were anxious or distressed.
“We saw people were treated with kindness and compassion by a caring staff group.” from the report
Food and health support
People were offered suitable meals, snacks and drinks. Staff monitored nutrition and involved health professionals when needed.
“We found people were provided with a balanced and varied diet that helped maintain their weight.” from the report
Good management
The home had a clear management structure and used audits to check care, medicines, records, accidents, nutrition and safety.
“The provider's procedures for monitoring and assessing the quality of the service continued to operate at two levels.” from the report
Activities were not consistent
needs fixingActivities and meaningful stimulation were not regular, well planned or personalised enough. One relative also reported a lack of stimulation.
“However, this was not regular or well planned and could be greatly improved on a personalised and individual basis.” from the report
Some areas looked tired
minorA visitor described some parts of the building as looking tired. The manager said these areas were included in the annual redecoration programme.
“One visitor described some areas of the building as looking 'tired'.” from the report
- 01How often does each person now receive an activity planned around their own interests, abilities and preferences?
- 02Has the proposed additional staff member or activities coordinator been appointed, and what activities do they provide?
- 03How will you make sure my relative and family are involved in care plan reviews?
- 04Can we see the current care plan and explain how our relative's preferences and activities are recorded?
- 05What action has been taken in response to complaints about the variety of food choices?
This was an inspection of the overall service and covered all five key questions, including care, the premises and how the home was managed. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 August 2018 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 Oval House
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- August 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leicester
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 £1,270 a week. 83 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“Tino was the most wonderfully rounded, empathetic and intuitive person. He not only developed a great relationship with Neville but also had a great working relationship with our existing carer.”
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.