Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Pine View Care Homes

Silver Birches

85 Lutterworth Road, Aylestone, Leicester, LE2 8PJ

Requires improvementpublished 5 October 2023, 2 years ago

Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Requires improvement
People were protected from harm and staffing levels, medicines and health risks were generally managed safely. However, some bedding and equipment were unclean, and some as-required medicines records did not explain the reason, effect or timing.
Effective?
Good
People's health, nutrition and hydration needs were supported. Staff training was up to date, and legal requirements about capacity and best-interest decisions were being followed.
Caring?
Good
Staff were kind, respectful and familiar with people's needs and preferences. People were supported with privacy, dignity and independence, although not everyone was involved in care plan reviews.
Responsive?
Good
Care plans reflected people's needs and communication requirements were supported. Inspectors found that activities were limited and recommended improving their number and frequency.
Well-led?
Requires improvement
Leadership and oversight had improved, but quality assurance systems were not yet reliable or fully embedded. The home remained in breach because its systems had not identified problems with infection control and some medicines audits.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, October 2023

Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found major progress since the last inspection, but infection control and quality checks were still not reliable.

Inspectors visited without notice on 22 and 23 August 2023. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicines records and management documents.

The home had improved in several important areas. Medicines, health risks, staffing, safeguarding and the environment were generally managed safely. Staff were kind, knew people well and supported them respectfully.

Some mattresses, cushions, bedding and equipment were not clean. Quality checks had not found these problems. People and relatives were not always invited to care reviews, and activities were limited.

The overall rating is Requires Improvement. Safe and Well-led were Requires Improvement, while Effective, Caring and Responsive were Good. The home had previously been rated Inadequate and placed in Special Measures, but it is no longer in Special Measures.

What inspectors praised
  • Safer staffing

    Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, and call bells and requests for help were answered promptly. Recruitment checks had also been completed.

    At this inspection we found there were now sufficient numbers of staff.from the report
  • Kind and respectful care

    Staff knew people well and supported them in line with their preferences. Inspectors saw warm interactions and support that protected privacy and dignity.

    People were supported by staff who were kind and caring who respected people's individual needs and preferences.from the report
  • Better risk management

    Records gave staff clearer guidance about people's needs and risks. Diabetes care, pressure care, fire arrangements and environmental safety had improved.

    Information within care plans and risk assessments were now consistent, and guided staff to support people safely in line with their identified needs and risks.from the report
  • Good partnership working

    The home worked with health professionals and the local authority. Inspectors were told that staff listened and responded to professional advice.

    We can't praise the staff highly enough. They listen and respond to our advice and recommendations.from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Cleaning and infection control

    needs fixing

    Some mattresses, pressure-relieving cushions, bedding and equipment were stained or had not been cleaned effectively. Inspectors were not fully assured that infection control arrangements were embedded.

    There were some stains to mattresses, pressure relieving cushions and bedding, and some equipment had not been cleaned effectively.from the report
  • Weak quality checks

    serious

    The home's audits and oversight did not consistently identify problems. The lack of arrangements during the care manager's absence contributed to these shortfalls.

    Systems, processes, and oversight of the service were still not fully effective or embedded.from the report
  • Care reviews

    needs fixing

    People and relatives were not always invited to reviews of care needs. The report recommends that all people and those important to them are consistently invited.

    Not all people and relatives said they were involved in care plan reviews.from the report
  • Limited activities

    minor

    Several relatives said there were too few activities. The report recommends consulting people and relatives to improve the number and frequency of activities.

    Five out of the 9 relatives we spoke with said the service needed to offer more activities.from the report
  • Medicines records

    needs fixing

    Records for some as-required medicines did not show why they were given, their effect or the timing. The medicines audit also did not cover all relevant checks.

    when these medicines were administered the reason, effect or timing was not recorded.from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How are mattresses, pressure-relieving cushions, bedding and other equipment checked and cleaned, and how do you make sure problems are found promptly?
  2. 02What changes have been made to quality audits since the care manager's absence, and how will you show that these checks are working?
  3. 03How will my relative and family be invited to care plan reviews?
  4. 04What activities are now available, and how are people's interests and wishes used to plan them?
  5. 05How are as-required medicines recorded, including why they were given, their effect and the time they were administered?

This was an unannounced follow-up inspection focused on action from the previous inspection and infection prevention and control; Caring and Responsive had not been inspected at the previous three inspections and their Good ratings remained at this inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 October 2023 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Silver Birches

6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.

  1. October 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingup from Inadequate
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read what inspectors found at Silver Birches

  2. June 2023Inadequatedown from Requires improvement
    Safe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. August 2022Requires improvementdown from Good
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. September 2021Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. October 2018Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. February 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. June 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  8. August 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  9. January 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  10. August 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  11. May 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  12. September 2011

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  13. January 2011

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 January 2011.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.

Another option

Or stay at home with a private carer

Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.

Nearby

Other care homes near Leicester

The Magnolia Care Home

Leicester, LE2 · 0.3 km
Requires improvement
ResidentialDementia
Rated 2 years agocare home

Everdale Grange

Leicester, LE2 · 0.4 km
Good
NursingDementia
Rated 16 months agoReport explained

Aylestone

Leicester, LE2 · 0.4 km
Good
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home

Lutterworth View

Leicester, LE2 · 0.4 km
Good
Residential
Rated 22 months agocare home