You are here

Briarwood Care Home Requires improvement

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 18 July 2012
Date of Publication: 12 August 2012
Inspection Report published 12 August 2012 PDF | 54.53 KB


Inspection carried out on 18 July 2012

During an inspection in response to concerns

We spoke with one relative during our inspection. She told us that the staff and the manager were very supportive and always listened to any concerns she had. She also told us that she was always kept up to date with the condition of her relative. She said “It’s brill, staff are nice and mum seems fine”. She also thought that there were enough staff around and that they seemed to know what they were doing and were very good at maintaining people’s dignity. She added “It’s always clean here and there are never any awful smells. It’s one of the reasons we chose this place for mum.”

Because many of the people who live at Briarwood had problems with short term memory loss or had dementia, they often found it difficult to remember recent events or to hold conversations related to their care at Briarwood. We used a formal way to observe people’s experiences of living in the home and their interactions with each other and with staff. We call this the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). We also spent time observing activity within Briarwood where we did not use the formal structure of SOFI. Both of these methods allowed us to understand better the experiences of people who lived at Briarwood.

Throughout our observations we saw people being treated with dignity and respect. We saw that staff were able to communicate with people who used verbal and non verbal communication. Staff smiled at people and asked them how they were. They also waited for people to respond and then acted according to the response.

We observed staff during meal time in one of the lounges, assisting people who didn’t wish to go to the dining room. We saw that people were given choices with food and drinks. We also saw that staff noted when people hadn’t eaten much of the meal they had chosen and offered alternatives such as sandwiches and desserts.

In addition, we saw that some people needed assistance with their food. We saw one member of staff who sat and took time to engage with the person they were helping. They encouraged the person and made eye contact often. Both they and the person they were assisting were focussed on each other and the food. This was positive and showed that the members of staff knew how to engage with the people they were assisting and made sure that they had good experiences.