• Care Home
  • Care home

Braintree Nursing Home

11 Coggeshall Road, Braintree, Essex, CM7 9DB (01376) 552391

Provided and run by:
Archers Healthcare Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

Inspection summaries and ratings from previous provider

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 28 February 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

This inspection took place on 28 January and 29 January 2019 and was unannounced. The team on the first day of the inspection consisted of two inspectors and an expert by experience. An expert by experice is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service, on this occasion their expertise was in dementia care. A Specialist Professional Advisor (SPA) also supported this inspection. The SPA had specialist knowledge of caring for the elderly, including dementia care. The second day of the inspection was completed by one inspector and an inspection manager.

Service and service type:

Braintree Nursing Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

What we did:

Before the inspection we reviewed information available to us about this service. The provider had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a document that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at the information provided in the PIR and used this to help inform our inspection. We contacted the Mid Essex Clinical Commissioning Group to obtain their feedback on how well the service was meeting the needs of people funded to receive nursing care. We also looked at previous inspection reports, details of safeguarding events and statutory notifications sent by the provider. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us by law, like a death or a serious injury.

We spoke with 10 people who were able to express their views, but not everyone chose to or were able to communicate effectively or articulately with us. Therefore we used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI) which is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We spoke with 10 people’s relatives, the registered manager and provider. We also spoke with the deputy manager, trainer, care practitioner, three nurses and four support workers. We looked at six people's care records, and recruitment records for three staff. Other records reviewed, included medicines management, complaints, staff training, and systems for monitoring the quality of the service.

Overall inspection


Updated 28 February 2019

About the service: Braintree Nursing Home is a residential care home that was providing personal and nursing care to 45 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection.

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

People’s experience of using this service:

Staff understood the risks to people and the measures in place to keep them safe. Systems were in place to manage people’s medicines safely and to reduce the risks associated with the spread of infection.

Sufficient numbers of staff were employed to meet people’s needs. Staff received training that gave them the necessary skills and knowledge to carry out their roles and meet the specific needs of people using the service. Champions were promoted in the service. These are staff that have shown a specific interest in areas, such as promoting dignity and are essential in promoting best practice, by sharing their learning, acting as a role model for other staff. This ensured people received good quality care.

People were provided with the care, support and equipment they needed to stay independent. Staff were kind and caring and had developed good relationships with people using the service.

People were supported to maintain their health and had access food and drink based on their individual choice and preferences. People had access to a wide range of activities in the community and within the service, that reflected their specific needs and interests.

People’s communication needs had been assessed and were meeting the requirements of the Accessible Information Standards. This set of standards sets out the specific, approach for providers of health and social care to identify, record, share and meet the communication needs of people with a disability, impairment or sensory loss.

People's privacy, dignity and rights were respected and upheld. People were supported to have maximum choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

The provider had clear and effective systems in place to identify and manage risks to the service and drive improvement. There was an open culture of learning from mistakes, concerns, incidents and accidents. The registered manager and staff worked well with other agencies to ensure people received high quality joined up care.

Rating at last inspection: Requires improvement (Report published 21 February 2018)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

Follow up:

Our previous inspection in October 2017 (Published February 2018) identified improvements were needed in relation to recruitment practices, cleanliness and hygiene. There had been a lack of oversight of the service by the provider and the registered manager to ensure the service delivered was of a good quality, and safe.

During this inspection we found the required improvements had been made. We will continue to monitor all intelligence received about this service to ensure that the next planned inspection is scheduled accordingly.