You are here

Burgh House Residential Care Home Limited Requires improvement

We are carrying out checks at Burgh House Residential Care Home Limited using our new way of inspecting services. We will publish a report when our check is complete.

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 6 April 2017

This inspection took place on 22 February 2017 and was unannounced. Burgh House Residential Care Home provides accommodation and care for up 40 people.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

This inspection found that there were two breaches the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. We identified a breach of Regulation 12 which related to the safety of the arrangements in place to manage people’s medicines. We found considerable medicine stock imbalances that had been caused by several different issues.

We also identified a breach of Regulation 17. This was because the provider’s quality assurance systems had failed to identify the problems with the medicines management arrangements and issues we found in relation to care planning. These needed improvement to ensure that plans were in place to meet people’s individual health and care needs. Care records did not always contain sufficient guidance and information for staff. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

The service had a strong focus on meeting people’s social and emotional needs as well as their physical needs. This resulted in people having a positive experience of life at Burgh House. Staff went to considerable lengths to ensure that people could live their lives as they chose, that they were content and fulfilled. If any concerns were raised, these were minor in nature. They were looked into and resolved to people’s satisfaction.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff were well trained and supported by their colleagues and service managers.

People received a choice of food and people’s preferences and special diets were catered for.

Staff were caring and had developed good relationships with people living in the home and their relatives.

There was pleasant, calm atmosphere in the home. People chatted happily between themselves and staff engaged well with them without being intrusive. There was plenty going on for people to involve themselves in if they wished.

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 6 April 2017

The service was not consistently safe.

The service had not yet effectively implemented their electronic medicines management system. We found widespread concerns in this area.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and recruitment processes were robust.

Risks to people’s welfare were identified and acted upon.



Updated 6 April 2017

The service was effective.

People received care and support from staff that had up to date training and were well supported by senior staff and managers.

Staff knew how to support people who lacked capacity to make their own decisions.

People were supported to eat and drink enough. The food was good and people enjoyed it.



Updated 6 April 2017

The service was caring.

People were positive about the staff that supported them. The home had a friendly atmosphere and people’s visitors were welcomed.

The service utilised several ways of obtaining people’s views about their care and were able to assist people to access an advocacy service if they wanted to.



Updated 6 April 2017

The service was responsive.

Staff paid attention to detail to ensure that they responded effectively to people’s needs and comments.

People were confident that if they needed to make a complaint that it would be investigated and handled in a fair manner.


Requires improvement

Updated 6 April 2017

The service was not consistently well led.

The systems in place were not always been effective at identifying areas of concern.

We received positive feedback regarding communication in the service. The manager and provider had fostered a positive culture that benefitted everyone living in, visiting and working in the home.