CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Broadwindsor House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that people were protected from avoidable harm. Risks were reviewed, staffing levels met people's needs, medicines were managed safely and infection control procedures were robust.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected in detail during this visit.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected in detail during this visit.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected in detail during this visit.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found consistent management and a positive culture. Leaders understood their responsibilities, used audits to oversee quality and risk, and involved people, relatives and staff.
What inspectors found, June 2023
Broadwindsor House was rated Good; inspectors found safe care and strong management, with no breaches reported.
This was an unannounced inspection. Inspectors visited on 26 May 2023 and reviewed records, medicines, recruitment files and management checks. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and health professionals.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, regular risk reviews, safe medicines systems and good infection control. People and relatives said they felt safe and received medicines on time.
Inspectors found a positive culture and strong management oversight. Audits were used to identify and resolve issues, staff felt supported, and the home worked well with health and social care professionals.
This was not a full review of every area of care. Only Safe and Well-led were inspected in detail. The overall Good rating remained unchanged from the previous rating published in October 2017.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe. Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse or poor practice.
“People told us they felt safe living at the home. Relatives agreed.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff on duty to meet people's needs. People were helped within a reasonable time when they asked for assistance.
“There were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines records were complete and legible. Staff who administered medicines had suitable training and regular competency checks.
“People's medicines administration records were legible and complete. Any issues were followed up in a timely way.” from the report
Strong oversight
Managers used audits covering areas such as care plans, health and safety, training and call bell response. Issues found through audits were dealt with quickly.
“The registered manager and deputy manager undertook various audits providing a robust oversight of quality and risk in the home.” from the report
Positive culture
Staff described a supportive workplace where colleagues worked well together. Professionals who visited regularly also spoke positively about the care and management.
“The home had a positive culture. Staff enjoyed working with their colleagues and fully supported each other.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you make sure staffing levels continue to meet my relative's needs, particularly if their needs change?
- 02How often will my relative's risks, including mobility, skin, diabetes or nutrition risks, be reviewed?
- 03What checks are made to confirm that medicines given only occasionally are administered consistently?
- 04What did the most recent care plan, health and safety, training and call bell audits find?
- 05How would you manage an infection outbreak while continuing to support family visits?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; the other key questions were not inspected in detail and their ratings were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 June 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.
What inspectors found, October 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements in activities and dementia support.
This was an unannounced inspection on 6 September 2017. One inspector spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and a health professional. They observed care and a mealtime, and checked care plans, staff files, medicines records and rotas.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines systems, personalised care plans, support with food and healthcare, and kind and respectful care.
Activities had improved since the previous inspection. An activity coordinator had been employed, activities took place three afternoons a week, and staff supported people with morning activities and individual interests. Inspectors also found people and relatives were involved in care planning and knew how to complain.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw people receive help promptly. Medicines records were complete and medicines were managed safely.
“Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff spent time with people, encouraged conversation and treated people with dignity. People could receive personal care privately and were supported to make choices.
“People were cared for by kind and caring staff who went out of their way to help people and promote their well-being.” from the report
Improved activities
The home had employed an activity coordinator since the previous inspection. People had group activities, staff-led morning activities and support for individual interests such as walks.
“Activities took place three afternoons a week.” from the report
Personalised care planning
Care plans described people's needs, wishes and risks. People or their representatives were involved, and plans were reviewed when needs changed.
“Care plans were personalised to each individual and contained information to assist staff to provide care in a manner that respected their needs and individual wishes.” from the report
Lift out of order
minorThe lift had not worked for several months. A stair lift and staff support were available, but families should check how people with different mobility needs can access all areas now.
“However at the time of the inspection the lift had been out of order for a number of months.” from the report
Weekend staffing feedback
minorA satisfaction survey included concerns about staffing at weekends. The manager said staffing levels were sufficient and varied according to people's needs.
“Feedback raised concerns about staffing at weekends.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure someone is offered an alternative meal if they do not want the food provided?
- 02Has the lift been repaired, and how do people with limited mobility reach all parts of the home?
- 03How many staff are on duty at weekends, and how is this changed when people's needs increase?
- 04What activities are now available for people living with dementia, including individual interests and walks?
- 05How are families involved in reviewing care plans and decisions about care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection of all five key questions; the previous inspection had rated Responsive as Requires Improvement, and this report found improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 October 2017 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 Broadwindsor House
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 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
15 live-in carers within about an hour of Dorset
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 £1,040 to £1,340 a week. 11 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Even when things get a bit chaotic (as they sometimes do!), you’ve handled it with patience and a sense of humour — which is gold.”
“Nina was patient, focussed on my aunt's physical well-being, and unfazed by what at the time was a new and uncertain situation”
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.