CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Brambles
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured about most infection control arrangements, including PPE, testing, hygiene and visiting. They were only somewhat assured that outbreaks could be effectively prevented or managed because risk assessments and monitoring records were incomplete.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, April 2021
The Brambles was inspected but not rated; infection control was mostly in place, but some COVID-19 safety records and checks were missing.
This was a targeted inspection on 8 April 2021. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than reviewing all aspects of the home.
Inspectors were assured about visitor safety, social distancing, PPE, testing, hygiene, the home’s infection control policy and safe admissions. Staff had infection control and COVID-19 training, and visitors were welcomed through a controlled process.
There were some gaps. COVID-19 risk assessments for staff and residents had not been written into care plans. Staff completed infection control tasks, but these were not recorded or monitored. Temperature checks were discussed and the provider said they would start them immediately.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not provide a new overall rating for the quality of care.
Testing and training
The provider took part in COVID-19 testing and gave staff access to current guidance and relevant training.
“The provider participated in the COVID-19 testing programme, Staff had access to a COVID-19 folder that held relevant guidance and up to date information regarding the pandemic.” from the report
Controlled visits
Visitors had to book, follow entry checks and use a dedicated entrance leading directly to the visiting room.
“Visitors used a dedicated entrance, which led directly into the room where the visit took place.” from the report
PPE and hygiene
Staff used the correct PPE and followed good hygiene practices. There was enough PPE and it was disposed of safely.
“Staff supported people to remain safe by wearing the correct PPE and practising good hygiene standards.” from the report
Missing COVID-19 risk assessments
needs fixingRisk assessments for staff and residents had not been documented or included in people’s care plans.
“We found that risk assessments in relation to COVID-19 for staff and people who used the service had not been documented.” from the report
Infection control checks were not recorded
needs fixingThe home had infection control processes, but it did not monitor or record completed tasks. This meant it could not show that the tasks had been completed.
“However, the tasks completed by staff were not documented and as a result could not be evidenced as being completed.” from the report
Temperature checks not yet in place
minorInspectors discussed monitoring people’s temperatures as an infection control measure. The provider said this would be implemented immediately.
“The provider confirmed this would be implemented immediately.” from the report
- 01Have COVID-19 risk assessments now been completed for every resident and staff member, and are they included in care plans where needed?
- 02How are infection control tasks now recorded and checked by management?
- 03Were temperature checks introduced as promised, and how are the results recorded?
- 04What is the home’s current process for preventing and managing an infection outbreak?
- 05What are the home’s most recent ratings for care, effectiveness, responsiveness and leadership, as these were not assessed in this inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not provide a new overall rating or assess all five key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 April 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 2018
The Brambles is rated Good overall, but inspectors found the home was not always safe because some risk information was not recorded.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 27 February 2018. One inspector observed care, spoke with two staff, checked three care plans and reviewed records about training, incidents and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were all rated Good. Staff were described as kind, supportive and knowledgeable, and people were helped with health care, food, activities and community access.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Risks had been identified, but information about some risks and how to reduce them was not always written down. Staff generally knew what to do, and medicines, staffing, cleanliness and infection control were otherwise found to be managed safely.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff communicating thoughtfully and responding to people's signs and choices. Personal care was provided privately.
“We saw and heard how kind and caring staff were with people.” from the report
Individual care and communication
Care plans gave staff detailed information about how each person communicated and moved, helping staff respect individual choices.
“We saw comprehensive and individualised care plans which detailed, for example, the methods of communication and the specific movements of each person so that their choices were promoted and respected.” from the report
Enough staff for activities
There were enough staff to support people to go out, spend time with staff and take part in activities.
“There continued to be a sufficient number of staff to ensure people were able to go out if they wished.” from the report
Support for health and wellbeing
People had access to health and social care professionals and were supported to attend appointments. Staff also monitored food and fluid intake.
“We saw evidence that people continued to have access to the necessary health and social care professionals.” from the report
Risk information was incomplete
seriousSome known risks were not recorded in care or risk assessment files. This included choking risks and the risk of a feeding tube becoming blocked, which could make it harder for staff to provide consistently safe care.
“People's health care and mobility risks were assessed but the risks and how staff should address them was not always recorded.” from the report
Medication records needed checking
needs fixingTablets from the previous month had not been carried forward on medication records. Other checks allowed inspectors to reconcile the medicines, but the recording issue needed attention.
“Information on the medication administration records was discussed with staff because tablets from the previous month had not been carried forward.” from the report
Formal supervision was not yet in place
minorStaff could speak with the provider each day, but formal staff supervision was planned rather than already established.
“Staff said they were aware but did not have specific dates for supervision yet.” from the report
- 01Have all choking and feeding-tube risks now been recorded in each person's care and risk assessment files?
- 02How do you check that risk assessments are updated when people's health or mobility needs change?
- 03What checks are now made to ensure medicine administration records are complete and accurate?
- 04Has formal staff supervision been introduced, and how often does it take place?
- 05How will you involve us in reviewing our relative's care plan and communication methods?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with the overall rating remaining Good since the February 2016 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 March 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 Brambles
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016Goodstayed GoodEffective: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Cambridgeshire
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 £1,020 to £1,200 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
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.