CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Stratford Bentley Care Centre
Not yet rated: the CQC has not published a rated inspection for this home, which is usual for a new registration.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but the home was not always well-led and its safety checks needed improvement.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 2 October 2019. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff, managers and a healthcare professional. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, food and drink records, recruitment files and management records.
People were found to be safe, treated kindly and supported as individuals. Staff supported people's health, nutrition, choices, communication, activities and end of life care. The home was clean, and people and relatives were positive about the care.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive were all rated Good. Well-led was rated Requires Improvement because checks on the running of the home were not strong enough, and some safety and care records had not been reviewed properly.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people warmly and respectfully. People were supported with privacy, dignity and independence.
“The atmosphere in the service was warm, friendly and welcoming to everyone.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences and routines. Activities were adapted so that people with greater frailty could still take part.
“People were offered opportunities for meaningful occupation based on their previous interests and hobbies.” from the report
Good health support
People had access to healthcare professionals, and staff worked with other services to support people's health.
“They are good at working out whether people need to be seen or whether it is just part of an ongoing chronic condition.” from the report
Positive approach to choice
Staff supported people to make their own decisions wherever possible and used the least restrictive approach.
“We encourage people to make decisions. We never insist people do things. We just softly encourage people.” from the report
Weak formal oversight
needs fixingThe provider did not have a formal system to check that management policies and procedures were being followed. This meant some problems were not found quickly.
“However, the provider had no system to formally check and audit that the policies and procedures for the management of the home were being adhered to.” from the report
Fire safety records
seriousThe fire risk assessment contained many inaccuracies. Inspectors also found no evidence that the electrical installation had been checked within the recommended five-year period.
“The home fire risk assessment prepared in February 2019 contained many inaccuracies which meant it was not suitable or sufficient.” from the report
Some equipment risks not reviewed
seriousSome equipment and areas had not been properly risk assessed. In one case, a bed rail assessment had not been reviewed after the person's health changed.
“Equipment and areas of the home had not always been risk assessed to ensure they kept people safe.” from the report
Medicines checking
needs fixingWhen only one nurse was present, a care worker without medicines training countersigned some checks. The provider said it would review its policy and provide suitable training and support.
“When only one nurse was in the home, this was done by a member of care staff who had not received training in safe medicines practice.” from the report
Further staff training
needs fixingInspectors said staff would benefit from more detailed training in diabetes and catheter care.
“However, we found staff would benefit from more in-depth training to help them develop their skills further in areas such diabetes and catheter care.” from the report
- 01What formal audits and checks are now used to make sure policies and procedures are followed?
- 02Has the fire risk assessment been corrected, and has the electrical installation been checked by a competent person?
- 03How are equipment risks, including bed rails and window restrictors, reviewed when a person's health changes?
- 04Who now checks medicines when only one nurse is on duty, and what training have they received?
- 05What extra training have staff completed in diabetes and catheter care, and how often do staff meet managers to discuss their support and training?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering the care home and all five questions; the registered personal care service for the nearby bungalows was not inspected because there were no care packages in place. 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.
What inspectors found, April 2017
Stratford Bentley Care Centre was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care, with a temporary activities vacancy and one report of a delayed night call bell.
Inspectors visited on 7 March 2017 without giving notice. They spoke with people living at the home, visitors, relatives and staff. They observed care and reviewed care files, medicines records, fluid charts, staff records and quality checks.
The home provided personal and nursing care for up to 30 older people. There were 22 people living there during the inspection. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines arrangements, suitable care records and appropriate safeguarding procedures.
People were treated with respect and kindness. They were supported with food, drink, healthcare, activities, hobbies and contact with family and friends. The manager was accessible and used checks, meetings and feedback to make improvements.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspection found the service met the relevant standards at that time. The previous overall rating was also Good.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors saw enough staff available during the visit, with call bells answered promptly. Medicines were stored, administered and checked safely.
“We observed there were enough staff to care for people effectively and safely during our inspection visit.” from the report
Respectful care
People and relatives said staff were kind and respectful. Inspectors saw staff protect people's privacy and explain what they were doing.
“Staff treated people with respect and kindness. Staff knew people well, and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Individual care
Care records included people's health needs, preferences, likes, dislikes and communication requirements. Staff used handovers to respond to changes.
“Care records gave staff information about how people wanted their care and support to be delivered.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People had choices of food and drink, including alternatives, and staff knew about dietary needs. Referrals to healthcare professionals were made when needed.
“People were offered a range of drinks when they sat down to eat their meal, which included wine and hot drinks.” from the report
Open management
The manager was accessible to people, relatives and staff. The home gathered feedback and used audits and action plans to improve its work.
“The manager was accessible to people who used the service, their relatives, and members of staff.” from the report
Activities staff vacancy
needs fixingThe full-time activities co-ordinator post was vacant during the inspection. Some people said they wanted more activities and felt this was not the same without a dedicated worker.
“The staff try their best doing some activities, but it isn't the same as having someone who does it every day.” from the report
Night-time call bell waits
minorOne person said they had waited for a call bell to be answered at night. The manager said audits were used to check that waits were not unacceptable.
“There is only two staff on a night, I had to wait the other night when I rang the call bell.” from the report
- 01Has the full-time activities co-ordinator vacancy been filled, and what activities are available now?
- 02How quickly are night-time call bells answered, and can you show recent call bell monitoring results?
- 03How do you make sure staffing levels continue to meet each person's changing needs?
- 04How are medicines checked to ensure every person receives them at the prescribed time?
- 05How will the home use feedback from residents and relatives to make further improvements?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection of the overall service and all five key questions, including care, staffing, medicines, records and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 April 2017 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 Stratford Bentley Care Centre
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Stratford Bentley Care Centre →
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Stratford Bentley Care Centre →
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 February 2016.
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 Warwickshire
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 £950 to £1,260 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 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.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.