CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 14 Southwood Avenue
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. There were enough staff, risks were assessed with people, medicines were managed safely overall and infection-control arrangements were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff assessed people's needs before they moved in and provided personalised care, training and support. People were supported with healthy food, healthcare, education and work opportunities.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with dignity and respect, used communication methods suited to each person and supported people to make choices about their care and daily lives.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Support was exceptionally tailored to people's needs, wishes and goals. Inspectors found strong work to build confidence, communication, independence, relationships and community involvement.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Management was described as visible, approachable and open. Quality checks covered care, medicines and health and safety, and lessons from incidents and audits were shared with staff.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Cambian Asperger Syndrome Services Limited - 14 Southwood Avenue was rated Good overall, with Outstanding personalised support and a small medicines-record issue fixed during the inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection on 17 January 2023. Inspectors spoke with six people, three relatives and eight staff. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management checks.
People told inspectors they felt safe, happy and well cared for. Staff understood people's communication needs, supported independence and helped people with education, work, travel, relationships and activities. The home had enough staff and worked with health and other services.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. It was rated Outstanding for Responsive, which means inspectors found especially strong personalised support, choice and help to achieve people's goals. The overall rating stayed Good, while Responsive improved from Good at the previous inspection.
Building independence
People were supported to make informed choices and take positive risks. This included managing medicines, travelling independently and moving towards work or other goals.
“Staff had supported people to be as independent as possible.” from the report
Highly personalised support
Staff understood people's individual needs, anxieties, identities and communication methods. Plans were created with people and adapted to help them achieve meaningful goals.
“The service had an exceptional, tailored person-centred approach.” from the report
Communication support
The home used individual communication plans, including emoji cards and speech and language support, so people could express their needs and feelings.
“People had created communication plans with staff which included, what do I understand, what can you do to help me, how do I communicate and what you can do to help me.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed warm, friendly interactions. Staff knew people well and respected their privacy, dignity, equality and choices.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Community and relationships
People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends, attend college and work placements, and take part in activities and interests outside the home.
“People were encouraged to take part in the local community.” from the report
As-needed medicines guidance
needs fixingSome as-needed medicines did not initially have protocols with enough information to support their appropriate use. The manager completed these during the inspection.
“Not all these medicines had protocols in place detailing enough additional information needed to ensure appropriate, effective use of these medicines.” from the report
- 01How will you keep the guidance for my relative's as-needed medicines complete and up to date?
- 02What goals would you help my relative work towards, and how would you measure progress?
- 03How would you communicate with my relative if they became anxious, distressed or found it difficult to speak?
- 04How would you support my relative to make choices and take positive risks while keeping them safe?
- 05How would you help my relative maintain family relationships and take part in activities, education or work?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the premises; the previous rating was Good and Responsive improved to Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 February 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, August 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred support, but noted staff vacancies and gaps in planning.
This was an unannounced inspection by one inspector on 18 July 2019. The inspector spoke with people living at the home, a relative, staff and a visiting professional. They also reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home supported eight young people aged 16 to 25 with autistic spectrum condition. Inspectors found that people felt safe and that staff were kind, skilled and focused on building independence. Care plans were personalised, activities supported community involvement, and medicines were managed safely.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The overall Good rating means inspectors found consistently good care and management, although they identified some areas that needed attention.
Building independence
Support focused on helping people gain skills, confidence and greater independence. People were supported to take part in daily tasks and community activities.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely by trained staff. Records were checked and occasional medicines had clear instructions.
“Medicines were managed safely and administered by trained staff.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as caring and friendly. Inspectors observed staff respecting privacy and offering choices.
“People, professionals and their families described the staff as caring, kind and friendly and the atmosphere of the home as relaxed and engaging.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's likes, dislikes, preferences and changing needs. People were involved in review meetings and setting goals.
“Care plans were personalised and updated in response to people's changing needs.” from the report
Quality checks
Managers carried out regular checks on care records, staff records, health and safety and the environment. Staff meetings included discussion of learning and improvements.
“Regular checks were completed by the registered manager and deputy team manager to make sure people were safe and that they were happy with the service they received.” from the report
Vacancies and agency staff
needs fixingThe home had vacancies and used agency staff. Some staff did not always have the skills needed for people's activities, such as a driving licence, which could reduce opportunities to go out.
“There were enough staff on duty. However, the service had a number of vacancies and agency staff were supporting the staff team.” from the report
End of life planning
needs fixingThe home had not explored people's preferences and choices about end of life care. Managers said they understood this needed to be done and that work would start after the inspection.
“People's end of life wishes had not been explored by the service.” from the report
Herbal medicine paperwork
needs fixingCapacity assessments and best-interest decisions had not been completed for herbal medicine. This was raised with the registered manager, who said it would be discussed with the person's support network.
“Assessments and, where appropriate, best interest decisions had not been completed for herbal medicine.” from the report
A rushed move
minorOne person's move from another service had happened quickly and could have been planned better. The home said it had learned from this and introduced clearer transition guidance.
“We were told that the move had been quick and could have been planned better.” from the report
Involvement in food shopping
minorOne person wanted to be more involved in food shopping. Staff said they would look at involving people more in future.
“I'd like to be part of the food shop” from the report
- 01How many permanent staff vacancies are there now, and how often is agency staff used?
- 02How do you make sure agency staff understand people's needs and have the skills needed, including driving?
- 03Have all residents now been supported to record their end of life preferences, including cultural and spiritual wishes?
- 04Have the required capacity and best-interest decisions been completed for herbal medicine?
- 05How are residents involved in food shopping and other daily tasks that build independence?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, with care and the premises both reviewed; all ratings were assessed at this inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 August 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 14 Southwood Avenue
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- August 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 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.