Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a nursing home

What the CQC found at Bourne View

Goodpublished 21 April 2020, 6 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
People felt safe and inspectors found suitable safeguarding, risk management, staffing, recruitment, infection control and incident review systems. Minor medicines recording issues were identified and corrected immediately.
Effective?
Good
People's needs were assessed and reviewed, staff were trained and supported, and health and nutritional needs were managed. The home worked with health professionals and followed the Mental Capacity Act.
Caring?
Good
People and relatives described staff as kind, respectful and supportive. Inspectors saw people being treated with dignity and involved in decisions about their care.
Responsive?
Good
Care was personalised and adapted to people's needs, communication requirements and interests. There was a varied activities programme, support to maintain relationships and a complaints process that had been used and resolved appropriately.
Well-led?
Good
Inspectors found an open and supportive culture, clear management arrangements and a range of audits. People, relatives, staff and health professionals expressed confidence in the management team.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, April 2020

Bourne View was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, personalised care, enough staff and effective management, with minor medicines recording issues corrected during the visit.

This was the first inspection since the home was registered in 2019. It took place over two days and included observations, conversations with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, and checks of care records, medicines, recruitment, training and management systems.

All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people felt safe, received personalised care from staff who knew them well, and had access to suitable activities, food and health support.

There were minor medicines recording problems. Some topical creams did not have opening dates, one cream was not listed on the medicines record, and some homely remedies did not show GP approval. The home took corrective action immediately.

What inspectors praised
  • Enough staff

    Inspectors found enough appropriately trained staff on each shift. Staff were not rushed and the home had arrangements to cover unexpected absences with people who knew the service.

    “There were enough staff employed on each shift to ensure people received individual, person centred care and support at all times.” from the report
  • Kind and respectful care

    People and relatives consistently described staff as kind, warm, compassionate and respectful. Care plans reflected people's choices, beliefs and preferred routines.

    “People and relatives consistently told us how they were treated with kindness, warmth, compassion and respect by all staff.” from the report
  • Personalised activities

    The home offered a wide range of activities and outings, with one-to-one support for people who preferred to stay in their rooms. Relatives and friends were welcomed.

    “There was a full and varied schedule of activities people could take part in if they wished.” from the report
  • Strong oversight

    The home had regular audits, staff meetings and systems for learning from incidents. Inspectors found managers approachable and staff well supported.

    “There was a robust schedule of audits in place to ensure the quality of service was maintained and any shortfalls identified and acted upon.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Medicines records

    minor

    Some medicines records were incomplete. Two topical creams did not have opening dates, one cream was not listed on the medicines record, and homely remedy records did not show GP approval. Corrective action was taken immediately.

    “Two topical creams had not had their opened date recorded on them, and one person had a topical cream that had not been prescribed on their MAR.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How do you now check that topical creams have opening dates and are listed correctly on medicines records?
  2. 02How do you make sure homely remedies have been approved by the person's GP before they are used?
  3. 03How many staff are planned for each shift, and how do you cover unexpected absences?
  4. 04How are care plans updated when a person's health, preferences or communication needs change?
  5. 05Which activities and outings would be suitable for my relative's interests and abilities?

This was the first planned inspection and covered the premises and care provided, with ratings given for all five key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 April 2020 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 Bourne View

Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.

  1. April 2020Goodcurrent rating
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Bourne View →

  2. March 2019

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 March 2019.

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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

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.”
Pat A., about Gloria Z.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
Emily B., about Prisca S.
See live-in carers near Bournemouth, Christchurch and PooleProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.