The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Briarwood

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Whitmore Road, Blaydon On Tyne, Tyne and Wear, NE21 4AN (0191) 414 8374

Provided and run by:
Everyturn

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 4 to 25 February 2026. Briarwood is a nursing home that provides care and support for up to 26 people who have mental health needs and dementia. This is an assessment service where people usually stay for 12 weeks whilst staff review their needs and determine what approaches can be used to best meet their needs. At the time of inspection, 26 people were using the service.

Since the last inspection the organisation has changed its name to Everyturn and there has been 3 changes of registered manager. We completed this inspection as part of our routine programme, and because of the length of time since the last full inspection was completed.

Briarwood demonstrated a strong commitment to delivering safe, effective, caring, responsive, and well-led care.

People told us they felt safe and staff treated them with kindness and respect. The service supported people for a relatively short period of time but despite this staff really knew people well. Staff treated people with the upmost empathy and compassion and spoke with fondness about the people they supported. Relatives described staff as caring and attentive, and we observed warm, patient interactions throughout the home.

The provider and senior leadership team had developed a strong learning and governance culture and ensured robust quality assurance measures were in place. Routine service reviews were completed, and these had been nuanced to suit each location. Both senior managers and trustees took part in these reviews and completed listening exercises with people. The quality and safety team had a range of tools and audits in place, which helped staff understand risk and outcomes. The provider shared any learning across the wider organisation. Staff told us they felt supported, listened to and were able to speak up. We saw that leaders were visible and approachable.

Care was effective and person‑centred. Assessments were detailed and regularly updated, and staff understood people’s health conditions and how these affected them day to day. The provider was in the process of ensuring the new electronic care record system enabled staff to readily obtain information about how interventions they introduced had impacted people and whether these effectively supported people to reduce or mitigate any risks they faced.

Staff worked proactively with external professionals, sought medical input when needed and kept families informed. People’s nutritional needs were well met, with staff providing one‑to‑one support at mealtimes where required. Mental capacity assessments and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications were completed where necessary, and staff understood the Mental Capacity Act and the Mental Health Act.

The environment was well maintained, and risks associated with infection were assessed and generally well managed. However, a change to an external cleaning contractor meant people noticed a strong malodour throughout the home. When the housekeeper role moved to an external contractor, laundry duties were not included in this change. This impacted staff’s time and their ability to concentrate on the needs of people. The provider recognised this and was working with contractors to improve standards.

Staff demonstrated an excellent knowledge and understanding of how to work with people who had complex needs related to their dementia. They were very skilled at delivering this support. The provider’s ‘people team’ had ensured a robust training programme was in place and routinely evaluated its effectiveness.’

The provider valued diversity within the staff team. When a change in requirements for international workers had the potential to impact this, the senior management and Trustees proactively changed their minimum pay scales. The People’s director was actively engaged in discussions with the government about salary sacrifice schemes and measures which would make sure there was equitable access to benefits.

The Trustees, senior managers, quality and safety team, clinical leadership teams and the management team within the service constantly reviewed the operation of the service and actively made changes as and when these were needed. The empathetic, caring and person-centred approach demonstrated by senior leaders was mirrored in the way staff worked with people in the service. Their interactions were based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and the community.

13 November 2020

During an inspection looking at part of the service

About the service

Briarwood provides accommodation, personal and nursing care for up to 24 people living with dementia or mental health conditions. At the time of the inspection there were 16 people living in the home.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People felt very safe living in the home and receiving support from staff. They were happy, comfortable and spoke highly of staff members and management, describing them as “lovely” and “friendly.”

Infection control processes were embedded into the service and staff followed government guidance in relation to infection control and prevention practices, in particular, relating to COVID-19. Staff wore appropriate PPE when supporting people. Staff and visitors to the home had their temperature checked and completed a risk assessment. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and safe recruitment processes were followed when recruiting new staff.

The home was well managed. People and staff were complimentary about the home and felt the manager was very approachable and open. An effective quality assurance process was in place.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 12 September 2019).

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part by concerns we had received relating to staffing levels being insufficient in the home. Also, as part of CQC’s response to care homes with outbreaks of coronavirus, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control practice was safe and the service was compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection t the IPC practices the provider had in place and considering potential risks around staffing and overall management, we had identified as part of CQC intelligence gathering.

We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from these concerns. Please see the Safe and Well-Led sections of this full report.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Briarwood on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

23 July 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service

Briarwood is registered to provide accommodation for up to 29 people with residential and nursing care needs. 17 people were using the service at the time of the inspection. Some of the people were living with a dementia type illness or had mental health needs.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Risks were well managed. The provider learned from previous accidents and incidents to reduce future risks. The registered manager understood their responsibilities about safeguarding and staff had been appropriately trained. Arrangements were in place for the safe administration of medicines.

There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people. The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure, and carried out relevant vetting checks when they employed staff. Staff were suitably trained and received regular supervisions and appraisals.

People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. Staff demonstrated a person-centred approach and had created strong personal links with people. Staff treated people with dignity and respect. They helped to maintain people’s independence by encouraging them to care for themselves where possible.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The provider had a complaints procedure and people were aware of how to make a complaint. An effective quality assurance process was in place. People and staff were regularly consulted about the quality of the service.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

10 November 2016

During a routine inspection

This unannounced inspection took place on 10 November 2016. We last inspected the service in August 2015 when it was rated overall as ‘good’.

Briarwood is set in its own grounds within a residential area of Blaydon. It compromises of two separate units that provide nursing care to people with mental health issues. ‘Meadows’ is a 12 bedded unit that cares for people who live with dementia and may exhibit behaviour that challenges. ‘Mill View’, is an all-female unit and provides support for 12 people to enable them to live independently within the local community.

The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Care plans were subject to regular review to ensure they met people’s changing needs. They were easy to read, based on assessment and reflected the needs of people. Risk assessments were carried out and plans were put in place to reduce risks to people’ safety and welfare

Where people were not able to make important decisions about their lives the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were followed to protect their rights. Staff were aware of how to identify and report abuse. There were also policies in place that outlined what to do if staff had concerns about the practice of a colleague.

Staff were trained to an appropriate standard and received regular supervision and appraisal. As part of their recruitment process the service carried out background checks on new staff. The service was not using a dependency tool to help them set staffing levels, we made a recommendation about this.

The service managed medicines appropriately. They were correctly stored, monitored and administered in accordance with the prescription. People were supported to maintain their health and to access health services if needed. People who required support with eating and drinking received it and had their nutrition and hydration support needs regularly assessed.

Staff had developed good relationships with people and communicated in a warm and friendly manner. They demonstrated good communication skills in relation to supporting people who lived with mental health difficulties. They were aware of how to treat people with dignity and respect. Policies were in place that outlined acceptable standards in this area.

There was a complaints procedure in place that outlined how to make a complaint and how long it would take to deal with. People were aware of how to raise a complaint and who to speak to about any concerns they had. The registered manager understood the importance of acknowledging and improving areas of poor practice identified in complaints.

The home was well led by a registered manager who had clear ideas about the purpose of the service. A quality assurance system was in place that was utilised to improve the service.

13 and 14 August 2014

During a routine inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service.

Briarwood provides nursing care for up to 29 people with mental health needs.  At the time of this inspection there were 24 people living at Briarwood. The bottom floor called ‘Meadows’ provides accommodation for individuals living with dementia and the top floor called ‘Millview’ provides accommodation for individuals diagnosed with mental health conditions.  Extensive redecoration work was being carried out to Meadows which meant that some areas were not available for people to use.

This was an unannounced inspection. The home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

We last inspected Briarwood in October 2013. At that inspection we found the service was meeting all the essential standards that we inspected.

People and family members told us they felt safe living at Briarwood. People said they felt settled and found it easy to talk with staff. We observed staff supporting people to maintain their safety. For example, we saw that staff assisted one person who used a wheelchair to negotiate around furniture.

On admission to Briarwood people were routinely assessed against a range of potential risks, such as poor nutrition, falls, skin damage and mobility. Where other risks had been identified assessments had been carried out to ensure people received appropriate care.

Staff had a good understanding of how to keep people safe and knew how to respond to safeguarding concerns and behaviours that challenged the service.

Mental Capacity Assessments had been completed in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We also found the provider acted in accordance with the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Where required DoLS applications had been made to the local authority.

The provider had systems in place to ensure people received their medication from trained and competent staff. Records showed that people received their medication when it was due. Some people told us they felt the evening medication round was too late and this affected when they could go to bed.

We found that there were enough trained staff to meet people’s needs. Staff we spoke with said they were well supported by the management team and had opportunities to have one to one time with their manager. Staff had completed specialist training to help them support  people’s individual needs, such as catheter training, dysphagia (swallowing difficulties), wound management, stroke care and phlebotomy (taking blood).  

The provider had systems in place to identify people who were at risk of poor nutrition. We saw that people were actively involved in preparing their own meals. Where people required assistance with eating and drinking they received this support uninterrupted.

People were supported to meet their healthcare needs and had regular access to a range of healthcare professionals, such as the GP, psychologist and the dietitian. Staff supported people to access health appointments when required.

Family members told us that their relative was well cared for. We observed care being delivered and found that people received their care from friendly and respectful staff. People received regular interaction from staff throughout our inspection. People were supported to maintain their independence and their interests. They also had access to a range of activities both inside Briarwood and in the community.

People were asked to give their consent before receiving any care. Care plans were evaluated regularly to ensure they were up to date.

People and family members had opportunities to give their views about the service and we found these views were acted on. We saw the views of family members were largely positive. We found the provider had in place a complaints policy and people told us they knew how to make a complaint.

The provider undertook a range of checks and audits as part of its quality assurance programme to assess the quality of care provided. This included both internal and external checks on the quality of care delivered. The findings from audits were used to make improvements to the service. Records showed that staff regularly logged any incidents and accidents, which included the specific details of the incident or accident and the action taken to deal with the situation. The on-line system used to record incidents had in-built senior management checks to ensure that appropriate action was taken following an incident. Information was analysed to look for trends and patterns and to identify learning to improve the quality of the care provided.

31 October 2013

During a routine inspection

People were asked for their consent before receiving care and treatment. One person commented, "Staff ask me if I want a bath." Another person commented, "I have a choice. If I say no staff accept that."

People had their needs assessed and the assessment was used to develop personalised nursing support plans. One person commented, 'It is very good here. I have been on the minibus to the coast and I go to the shops with the staff.'

We found people usually received their medication in a timely manner. Medication was only administered by trained and competent staff.

People who used the service, family members and staff told us there were enough staff to meet people's needs. One person commented, 'I can go to the staff anytime and get help straightaway', and, 'Lovely staff, all very nice.' Another person commented, 'All good people who work here.' Family members said, 'Staff are lovely, very understanding', and, 'There is always someone to talk to, they definitely look after her needs.'

People knew how to complain if they had any concerns about their care or treatment. One person commented, 'I am pretty happy with the care.' Another person commented, 'I have no complaints at all, if I did I would speak to the staff. The staff are nice.' One family member said, 'Spot on, no problems.'

2 October 2012

During a routine inspection

Some of the people who lived at the home had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences. We used a number of different methods to help us understand their experiences, which included speaking to relatives and observation. Throughout the observation we saw that staff treated people with respect and courtesy.

People who could share their experiences told us they were supported to maintain their independent daily living skills. One person told us, "I help lay the tables before each meal. It helps me stay involved."

People and their relatives were very positive about the standard of care. One relative said, "My wife used to get regular infections, but since coming here she has had only one. It's down to the care."

We reviewed four care records and saw that people's preferences and care needs had been well documented. We spoke with four members of staff. Staff were knowledgeable about the care needs of the people who used the service and what they should do to support them.

Staff received appropriate professional development and there was an effective system in place to make sure staff training was up to date so that staff could care for people safely and to an appropriate standard.

We found that the provider had made suitable arrangements to protect vulnerable people from the risk of abuse and that there was an effective system in place to monitor and assess the quality of the service.