CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Burlington
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infections, using protective equipment safely, carrying out testing, and managing outbreaks. They also found the infection prevention and control policy was up to date.
- 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?
- Outstanding
- 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
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and safe arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors visited the home on 1 April 2021. The visit was announced and focused on infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic.
They found arrangements for safe visiting, including a visiting pod, temperature checks, lateral flow tests and protective equipment. People were supported to keep in touch with families and to access healthcare.
The home was clean and hygienic. Staff had infection control and COVID-19 training, had the protective equipment they needed, and the home had plans for managing outbreaks and staff absence.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit checked infection control arrangements rather than giving a full overall quality rating.
Safe visiting
The home had created a visiting pod that could be reached without visitors travelling through the home. Visitors had temperature checks, a lateral flow test and protective equipment.
“A visiting pod had been created which was accessible without travelling through the home.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was clean and hygienic, with extra cleaning of frequently touched areas. Staff had received infection prevention and control training.
“The home was clean and hygienic. Additional cleaning schedules had been implemented, including of frequently touched areas.” from the report
Outbreak arrangements
People who tested positive were cared for separately from those who tested negative. Staff were assigned specifically to people who had tested positive.
“During an outbreak of COVID-19, people who had tested positive for the virus were cared for in a different part of the home to those who had tested negative.” from the report
Access to healthcare
People were supported to receive medical care during the pandemic. The GP provided weekly video consultations and face-to-face visits when needed.
“People had been supported to access medical or healthcare treatment if they needed it during the pandemic.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have the visiting arrangements changed since the April 2021 inspection?
- 02How do you now manage a COVID-19 or other infection outbreak, including separating people who test positive?
- 03How often are frequently touched areas cleaned, and how is this checked?
- 04How do people receive GP, district nurse and other healthcare when they need it?
- 05How would you manage increased staff absence during an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with the Safe question inspected but not rated; it was not a full inspection of all five questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 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, January 2020
The Burlington is Rated Good overall; inspectors found exceptionally responsive, kind care, with end-of-life planning still being developed.
This was the home’s first inspection since it registered. Inspectors visited on 3 and 6 December 2019. The first day was unannounced and the second was announced. They spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional. They also checked care records, medicines, recruitment files, safety records and quality checks.
Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and supported to make choices. Medicines, staffing, risk assessments and infection control were managed safely. People were supported to eat well and to access doctors and nurses when needed.
The home was rated Outstanding for being responsive. Inspectors found a wide range of activities, strong links with the local community and individual support for people who felt lonely. Care plans reflected people's preferences, and families were involved in planning care.
The overall rating of Good means the inspectors found consistently good care and management. Responsive care was judged exceptionally good. This was the first inspection, so there was no previous rating to compare it with.
Meaningful activities
The home offered a busy programme based on people's interests. People could keep up hobbies, attend events and take part in activities with the wider community.
“Activities were planned to meet people's individual needs and interests.” from the report
Support with loneliness
The home responded when some people said group activities did not fully prevent loneliness. Care companions provided individual support based on each person's needs.
“This had prompted the home to recruit 'care companions' to support people who experienced loneliness on a one-to-one basis.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives said staff were caring and respectful. Inspectors also saw staff respond quickly when people were anxious or upset.
“Staff treated people with respect and maintained their privacy and dignity.” from the report
Safe medicines and health support
Medicines records checked by inspectors were accurate and up to date. Staff acted promptly when they noticed health concerns and worked with GPs and district nurses.
“There were safe and effective systems for the ordering, storage, administration and disposal of medicines.” from the report
Good communication and oversight
Staff received handovers and managers held regular meetings to review people's needs, incidents and service quality. Families were kept informed about changes in care.
“There were effective systems of quality monitoring, which ensured that people received well-planned and managed care.” from the report
End-of-life plans were still being developed
minorThe home was not providing end-of-life care during the inspection. Plans were being developed so that people's wishes would be recorded, so families should ask how this is now being handled.
“Work had begun on the development of end-of-life care plans to ensure these reflected people's wishes.” from the report
- 01How would you record and review my relative's wishes about end-of-life care?
- 02How do you decide how many staff are needed for each shift, and how do you monitor call bell response times?
- 03If my relative feels lonely, what one-to-one support could be provided and who would provide it?
- 04How would my relative's interests, routines, communication needs and personal preferences be included in their care plan?
- 05The report says the dementia community had not opened at the inspection. What is its current status and how would dementia support be provided?
This was a planned first inspection covering all five key questions, including the care provided and the home’s premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 January 2020 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 Burlington
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- December 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 December 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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.