CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Bancroft Residential Home Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe recruitment checks, appropriate risk assessments and safe medicines practices. Staff understood safeguarding and the home reviewed incidents to reduce the chance of them happening again.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. The report says ratings for questions not inspected were carried over from the last inspection when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. The report says ratings for questions not inspected were carried over from the last inspection when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. The report says ratings for questions not inspected were carried over from the last inspection when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open, person-centred culture, visible managers and audits that monitored safety and care. The provider gathered feedback and worked with other professionals.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with some waits for the call bell at busy times.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 9 and 13 November 2023. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, staff and managers. They observed care and checked care records, medicines records, recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments and safe medicines arrangements. People were protected from abuse, infection risks and avoidable harm.
Inspectors found a friendly, open culture. Managers were visible, people were involved in decisions and audits were used to monitor safety and care. The overall Good rating also used ratings from the previous inspection for the areas not assessed this time.
Enough trained staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks and staff training supported safe care.
“The provider ensured there were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff followed medicines procedures, received training and had their skills checked every year. Any unclear instructions were followed up with the pharmacist.
“Staff received training in how to administer medicines safely. They had their competencies assessed annually” from the report
Open management
People knew the provider and deputy manager and said they saw them regularly. Inspectors found a calm, friendly atmosphere and good interactions between staff and residents.
“There was lovely atmosphere in the home which was calm and friendly.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The home reviewed care plans and involved health professionals after incidents. It also looked for patterns so staffing could be adjusted at busier times.
“The provider reviewed incidents over time to see if there were any patterns in how or when incidents occurred.” from the report
Call bell waits at busy times
minorOne person said call bell response was generally quite good but there could be a wait when the home was busy. They said this did not cause them problems.
“Call bell response is quite good, there can be a wait at busy times, but it doesn't cause me any problems.” from the report
- 01How do you monitor and improve call bell response times during busy periods?
- 02Which ratings from the previous inspection were used for Effective, Caring and Responsive?
- 03How often are medicines competencies checked, and what happens if an instruction is unclear?
- 04How do you use incident reviews to decide whether more staff are needed at particular times?
- 05How can relatives give feedback, and how is that feedback used to improve care?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; ratings for the other key questions carried over from the previous inspection when calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 December 2023 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, January 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, with some staffing and record-keeping points for the home to review.
Inspectors visited on 21 and 23 November 2017. The first visit was unannounced. They observed care, spoke with people, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment files and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were generally safe, treated with kindness and dignity, supported to make choices, and given care that reflected their needs and preferences.
Medicines, infection control, staff training, care planning and links with healthcare professionals had improved. Inspectors also found activities, food and end of life care were suited to people's individual needs.
The overall rating had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous comprehensive inspection in July 2016. The home had acted on the earlier concerns, although inspectors asked it to review staffing and strengthen some records.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as kind, attentive and respectful. Staff supported privacy, dignity and independence.
“Staff were kind and caring in their approach.” from the report
Individual care planning
Care plans recorded personal needs and preferences in detail. Senior staff reviewed them monthly, and relatives could take part in reviews.
“People's individual care plans were well-organised and kept under regular review by senior staff.” from the report
Activities and stimulation
The home provided group activities, outings and one-to-one time for people who stayed in their rooms or were cared for in bed.
“People were provided with physical and mental stimulation appropriate to their needs.” from the report
Improvement since the last inspection
The provider had acted on the shortfalls found in July 2016. This included improvements to medicines management and required notifications to CQC.
“The provider had taken action to address the areas for improvement identified at our last inspection.” from the report
Prescription cream records
needs fixingMedicines were otherwise managed safely, but the home did not record prescription creams in the same way as other medicines. The managers agreed to take action.
“the registered managers agreed to take action to ensure that the administration of any prescription creams was recorded in the same way as other medicines.” from the report
Shared-room risk records
minorThe managers considered the risks of shared rooms, but agreed that these assessments should be formalised and fully recorded in care files.
“the registered managers agreed to formalise the risk assessment of any room sharing arrangements and ensure these were fully documented in people's care files.” from the report
- 01How do you check that staffing is sufficient at weekends and when residents' needs increase?
- 02How are prescription creams recorded and checked now?
- 03How do you assess and record the risks when two people share a room?
- 04How are best interests decisions recorded, especially where medicines are given covertly?
- 05How will you involve our family member in care plan reviews and activity choices?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering the premises and care provided, with all five CQC questions rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 January 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 The Bancroft Residential Home Limited
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The Bancroft Residential Home Limited →
- January 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The Bancroft Residential Home Limited →
- September 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 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.
- June 2012
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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Lincolnshire
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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.