CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Acorn Luxury Care Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including visiting, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and managing possible outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection-control arrangements at Acorn Luxury Care Limited.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 4 February 2021. It looked at how the home prevented and controlled coronavirus infections, rather than reviewing all areas of care.
Inspectors found good practice. Visiting was by appointment, with temperature checks, personal protective equipment and guidance. The home had created a separate visiting entrance, kept its premises clean and had supplies of protective equipment.
Staff had up-to-date infection-control training and checks on their practical skills. People and staff were taking part in testing and vaccination arrangements, and families were kept informed about changing guidance.
The service was inspected but not rated. The inspection does not provide an overall rating or ratings for the other areas of care.
Safe visiting
Visits were arranged in advance and included temperature checks, protective equipment and guidance. A separate external door reduced unnecessary movement through the home.
“Visiting was by appointment only and safeguards included on arrival a temperature check and the appropriate PPE and visiting guidance being provided.” from the report
Clean premises
The premises and equipment were visibly clean. Staff regularly cleaned touch points and cleaning materials were available throughout the home.
“Additional cleaning included regular wiping of touch points throughout the day and sanitising hand wipes being used more frequently by people.” from the report
Trained staff
Staff had up-to-date infection-control training, including training on using protective equipment. Their practical skills were checked regularly.
“Staff were up to date with infection, prevention and control training and additional training had included how to put on and take off PPE safely.” from the report
Testing and vaccination
People and staff were taking part in regular testing and the vaccination programme. Consent and, where needed, best-interest decisions had been recorded.
“Both staff and people using the service were participating in both regular testing and the Covid-19 vaccination programme.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your infection-control arrangements changed since the inspection in February 2021?
- 02How do you now manage visits, including checks, protective equipment and the separate visiting area?
- 03How often are staff tested and how do you check their practical skills in using protective equipment?
- 04How do you keep families informed when visiting, admissions or other arrangements change?
- 05What are the home's current ratings for care areas that were not covered by this inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under Safe; the other areas of care were not assessed and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 2021 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.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Acorn Luxury Care Limited was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but consent records did not always protect people's rights.
This was an unannounced inspection over 5 and 8 July 2019. One inspector and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives, visitors, staff and health professionals. They also observed care and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and were treated kindly. Staff knew people's needs, supported their independence and worked well with health professionals.
There was one important shortfall. Mental Capacity Act assessments were missing for some decisions about care and photographs, and family members had given consent without the legal authority to do so. The registered manager said this was corrected during the inspection. The home also needed to improve some activity information and end of life care plans.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding and people's individual risks.
“People and their relatives told us they felt safe living at the home.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as caring. Inspectors saw people being supported with choices, dignity and independence.
“Staff treated people with dignity and respect.” from the report
Safe medicines systems
Medicines were ordered, stored and recorded safely. Staff competency was checked and medicine records were audited.
“The home managed their medicines safely.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked with health and social care professionals, and records showed that professional advice was followed.
“Records showed that instructions from health professionals were carried out.” from the report
Positive leadership
Staff felt supported and worked well as a team. The home used audits, meetings and feedback to improve care.
“Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the standard of care provided.” from the report
Consent and mental capacity records
seriousSome mental capacity assessments had not been completed for care decisions and photographs. Family members had given consent without the legal authority to do so, although the manager said this was corrected during the inspection.
“Consent was given on the persons behalf by family members who did not possess the legal authority to do so.” from the report
Activity information
minorActivities were available, but they were not initially advertised in the home. A pictorial planner was displayed after inspectors raised this.
“However, the activities were not advertised in the home.” from the report
End of life planning
needs fixingNobody was receiving end of life care during the inspection. Each person had an end of life plan, but some contained little information and were being improved.
“Each person had an end of life care plan however, some people had little information.” from the report
- 01How do you now record mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions for care and photographs?
- 02How do you make sure relatives only give consent when they have the legal authority to do so?
- 03How are daily and monthly activities currently advertised to people living in the home?
- 04How do you record and review each person's end of life wishes and preferences?
- 05What improvements have been made since the inspection in July 2019?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC key questions, with care and accommodation both considered. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 July 2019 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.
Every inspection of Acorn Luxury Care Limited
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 December 2010.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
37 live-in carers within about an hour of Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £1,000 to £1,340 a week. 26 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“We could not have managed without her calm, reassuring presence and practical knowledge and skill in caring and supporting both my husband and the family and I.”
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.