CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Bungalow
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place, including safe visiting, testing, use of PPE, social distancing and admissions.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2021
The Bungalow: Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were in place.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 17 March 2021. It checked how well the home was prepared to prevent and control coronavirus infections.
Inspectors were assured about visitors, social distancing, personal protective equipment, testing, admissions, cleanliness and the infection control policy. Staff worked only at this home, and new residents were isolated and retested as required.
The home was inspected but not rated. This was not a full inspection of the quality of care, and the report does not give ratings for the other four areas.
Controlled visiting
A booking system and a separate visiting area were planned to reduce infection risks and allow cleaning between visits.
“An area had been identified for visits, which had a separate entrance.” from the report
Staff arrangements
Staff worked only at this home, used appropriate PPE and had arrangements to keep apart during breaks.
“All staff only worked at this one care setting reducing the risk of any spread of infection.” from the report
Testing and admissions
Whole-home testing was being carried out. New residents were tested before admission, isolated for 14 days and tested again.
“Whole home testing was carried out at the service, in line with requirements.” from the report
Infection control policy
Inspectors found that the infection prevention and control policy was current and appropriate.
“There was an up to date and appropriate IPC policy in place.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visits arranged now, and is there still a separate visiting area?
- 02Do staff still work only at this home, or do they work at other care settings?
- 03How are new residents tested and supported during any isolation period?
- 04How often is the infection prevention and control policy reviewed?
- 05What are the home's current ratings for caring, responsiveness, effectiveness and leadership, which this inspection did not assess?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 March 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, October 2019
The Bungalow was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, although an earlier infection control audit had identified bedroom concerns.
This was an unannounced, planned comprehensive inspection on 10 September 2019. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff, observed care, and reviewed care, staffing, training, safety and management records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable care plans, regular risk checks and clean surroundings.
People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Inspectors found that people were treated with dignity, supported to make choices, helped with food and healthcare, and offered activities, outings and ways to raise concerns.
The previous rating was also Good, published in April 2016, although the provider had changed since then. The manager was still in the process of registering with the CQC.
Safe medicines and staffing
Medicines were ordered, stored, given and disposed of safely. Inspectors also found enough staff to meet people's needs and safe recruitment records.
“Systems for ordering, storing, administering and disposing of medicines were safe.” from the report
Respectful care
People described staff as kind and helpful. Inspectors found that privacy, dignity, preferences and equality were respected.
“People told us their dignity and privacy was respected.” from the report
Personalised support
Care files recorded people's backgrounds, interests, routines and relationships. People could make everyday choices such as when to get up, go to bed or have a bath.
“This helped staff offer more person-centred care and support.” from the report
Activities and family involvement
People could take part in activities, music and outings, while visitors were made welcome. The home also used residents' and relatives' feedback to make changes.
“A range of activities was on offer at the service, including bingo, music, cards, board games, newspapers and various outings.” from the report
Regular quality checks
The home carried out audits covering areas such as medicines, falls, care plans, infections and health and safety. Inspectors saw examples of changes made after audits or complaints.
“A programme of audits and quality checks, around issues such as health and safety, fire prevention, care plans, falls, medicines, weights, infections and notifications was undertaken regularly.” from the report
Earlier bedroom infection control concerns
minorThe latest external infection control audit had an amber score of 88%, with the main concern relating to people's bedrooms. Inspectors found the home clean on the day, but families should ask what action was taken and whether standards remain consistent.
“The latest external infection control audit at the home had scored 88%, which is an amber rating.” from the report
Manager registration was not complete
minorThe manager was in the process of registering with the CQC at the time of the inspection. Families may wish to ask whether this was completed and who currently manages the home.
“The service had a manager who was in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
- 01What action was taken after the external infection control audit scored 88% and identified concerns about bedrooms?
- 02Is the current manager registered with the CQC, and who is responsible for the home now?
- 03How do you make sure there are enough staff on every shift to meet residents' needs?
- 04How are my relative's preferences, routines, nutrition and communication needs recorded and reviewed?
- 05What activities and outings are currently available, and how do residents help decide what is offered?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the premises and care provided, with all five CQC questions rated Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 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 The Bungalow
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2019GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 September 2018.
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 Bolton
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 £1,260 a week. 92 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.