CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Dawson Lodge
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, March 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care, but medicines, risk records and activities were not consistently managed safely.
This was an unannounced inspection over three days. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good for Effective and Caring. People were treated with kindness and respect. Their needs were assessed, staff were trained, people had food and drink choices, and relatives could visit freely.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Safe, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found medicines procedures, risk assessments, falls records, activity records and quality checks were not always reliable. The manager took action during the inspection, but inspectors said more time was needed for the changes to become established.
The overall rating fell from Outstanding at the previous inspection, published in October 2018, to Requires Improvement.
Kind and respectful care
People said staff were kind, and inspectors observed compassionate care. Staff respected privacy and dignity during personal care.
“Our observations of staff interactions with people showed that people were treated with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff completed induction, mandatory training and specialist training, including dementia and end of life care. Staff also received regular supervision.
“The provider ensured staff completed specialised training courses to enable them to provide safe care and support.” from the report
Choice and involvement
People and relatives were involved in assessments and care reviews. People were offered choices about meals, communication and daily care.
“People and relatives views were considered by the service and were sought to make decisions about care.” from the report
Support at the end of life
The home discussed people's wishes and preferences and recorded them in care plans. Relatives were offered practical and emotional support during visits.
“The registered manager was passionate about providing responsive and empathic end of life care.” from the report
Prompt response to feedback
The manager acted during the inspection to address several concerns, including updating care plans, reviewing medicines processes and improving audits.
“When we raised these concerns with the registered manager and provider, they were immediately responsive.” from the report
Medicines safety
seriousThe medicines policy was not always followed. Inspectors found two administration errors for one person and records that could make it appear medicines had been given twice.
“We found medicines which were waiting to be returned to the pharmacy.” from the report
Risk and falls records
seriousCare plans did not always explain how to manage identified risks, such as dehydration. Falls monitoring and related records were not consistently completed.
“Care plans and risk assessments did not always contain enough information and detail to ensure people were supported safely.” from the report
Activities and social isolation
needs fixingSome people said they felt lonely. Inspectors found that some people had long periods without meaningful activities or interaction, including one person with no recorded meaningful interaction for three days.
“Some people we spoke to told us they were lonely.” from the report
Weak quality checks
seriousAudits did not identify all the concerns found by inspectors. Records, cleaning schedules and staffing dependency scores were not always complete or accurate.
“Audits; were not always robust or effective in identifying issues and drive improvement.” from the report
Fire evacuation information
needs fixingAfter fire procedures changed, personal emergency evacuation plans were not sufficiently clear. The provider reviewed and updated them during the inspection.
“This meant there was a risk evacuation times could be longer than required.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to medicines administration, disposal and record checks since the inspection?
- 02How are dehydration, falls and other identified risks now recorded and reviewed?
- 03How do you make sure people at risk of loneliness receive regular meaningful activities and interaction?
- 04What checks now confirm that care plans, daily notes, falls records and cleaning schedules are complete and accurate?
- 05How are staffing levels calculated, and how do you check that the dependency scores are accurate?
This was an unannounced inspection that assessed all five key questions and included infection prevention and control; inspectors reviewed records for seven people and multiple medicines records. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 March 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, November 2018
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found exceptionally caring, responsive and well-led support, with safe and effective care rated Good.
This was an unannounced inspection on 29 and 31 August 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training, complaints and how the home was monitored.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Caring, responsive and well-led were Outstanding. Safe and effective were Good. Inspectors found kind and respectful staff, personalised care, meaningful activities, strong end-of-life support and effective leadership.
The home had 42 people living there, against a capacity of 43. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable dementia-friendly surroundings and good support with health, food and drink. They identified a small recruitment records gap and some room for staff to improve their understanding of advanced dementia.
Kind and respectful staff
Staff were consistently described as compassionate and thoughtful. They treated people with dignity, encouraged independence and offered reassurance when people were anxious or confused.
“Staff went the extra mile to ensure people and their relatives felt welcomed, valued and important.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff took time to understand people's histories, preferences and hopes. Care plans gave detailed guidance about how each person wanted to be supported.
“There was a strong person-centred culture within the home.” from the report
End-of-life care
Staff had completed specialist end-of-life training and supported people and relatives with practical and emotional care. Health professionals confirmed that this had been put into practice.
“People received compassionate and sensitive care from staff at the end of their lives.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could choose from group and individual activities, trips, exercise, music and visits from children and a therapy dog. They were also encouraged to contribute to daily life in the home.
“The registered manager pro-actively engaged with the local community, identifying innovative opportunities to enhance people's daily lives and increase access to information and education around dementia.” from the report
Strong leadership
The manager was visible and approachable. The home welcomed feedback and used it to improve care, activities and staff development.
“There was excellent leadership within the home supported by a robust senior management structure within Anchor.” from the report
One recruitment reference was missing
minorOne staff member did not have a reference from previous care work. The report says all other checks were complete and the manager agreed to address this.
“References had been obtained for all but one staff member who had not previously worked in care.” from the report
Accessible information work was not complete
minorThe home was still working towards the Accessible Information Standard. It was already using pictures, signs, objects and electronic devices to help people understand information and communicate.
“The provider was working towards the Accessible Information Standards.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure all staff understand the health needs of people with advanced dementia?
- 02Has the missing employment reference mentioned in the report now been obtained and recorded?
- 03How do you check that staff use people's care plans and life histories in everyday care?
- 04How will you complete the work towards the Accessible Information Standard?
- 05How will you maintain the Outstanding standards found in caring, responsive care and leadership?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, the care provided and the home environment. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 November 2018 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 report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of Dawson Lodge
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- March 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from OutstandingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2018Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.