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
- People's risks were assessed and monitored, with enough suitably skilled staff to support them. Medicines, safeguarding, recruitment and infection control were found to be safe.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers promoted an open and inclusive culture, listened to feedback and used quality checks to monitor the service. Staff felt supported and understood their responsibilities.
What inspectors found, April 2023
The Bungalow was rated Good; inspectors found people were safe and the home was well managed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 5 April 2023. One inspector spoke with staff, reviewed care and management records, and observed people in a communal area. The inspector also contacted relatives and health and social care professionals.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found that risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely, staffing levels met people's needs, and infection control arrangements were effective.
Inspectors found an open and inclusive culture. Staff understood people's needs and relatives said they were kept informed. The overall rating remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection published in March 2018.
Staffing and risk management
Inspectors found enough staff with the skills and knowledge to meet people's different needs. Risk assessments and emergency evacuation plans were in place.
“People's risks were known and met by enough staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet people's varying needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff followed procedures for giving, recording and storing medicines. Training, competency checks and audits were in place.
“People received their medicines as prescribed, and systems were in place to support people to receive their medicines when they were out in the community or visiting their families.” from the report
Open management
Managers sought feedback and promoted an open, inclusive culture. Relatives said staff kept them informed and knew people's needs and preferences.
“The registered and deputy managers encouraged an open and inclusive culture within the service and regularly sought feedback about the quality of care given.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements to prevent and manage infections, including safe use of protective equipment.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you make sure there are enough suitably skilled staff when agency staff are being used?
- 02How do you check that medicines given as required are recorded and reviewed properly?
- 03How will you support my relative to have choice, control and independence in daily decisions?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be suitable for my relative?
- 05How will you keep our family informed about changes, incidents or concerns?
This inspection rated Safe and Well-led only; the report does not give ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 April 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, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control measures, but this was a limited inspection.
Inspectors visited the home on 10 February 2021. The visit was announced and focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
They found systems to reduce infection risks. These included visitor checks, PPE, testing, cleaning, social distancing, updated policies and staff training. People were supported to keep in touch with relatives and access the community safely.
The home was rated 'Inspected but not rated'. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most areas of care.
Infection prevention
The home had systems to reduce the risk of infection from visitors and within the home.
“We were assured that the provider was preventing visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
PPE and testing
Staff had infection control and PPE training. PPE was available and used appropriately, and regular COVID-19 testing was in place.
“There were sufficient stock of PPE and staff were seen wearing these appropriately.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was very clean, with extra cleaning of frequently touched surfaces and infection control audits.
“The environment was very clean. Additional cleaning was taking place including frequently touched surfaces, such as hand rails and light switches.” from the report
Support during restrictions
People were supported to keep in contact with relatives and to access the community safely. Emotional support was also available.
“Staff were supporting people to maintain contact with relatives through the use of mobile phones and telephone calls.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach. The report does not say that this was a breach.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now?
- 02How are visits from relatives managed now that restrictions have changed?
- 03How often are people, staff and visitors tested when there is an infection risk?
- 04What resources did inspectors suggest the home use to develop its approach?
- 05When was the home last given a full inspection and overall rating?
This was a targeted, announced inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 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.
Every inspection of The Bungalow
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 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 Plymouth
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. 9 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.