CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Dearbourne Manor
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe, risks were assessed and reviewed, and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Medicines and infection control were managed safely, although a fire-door repair had been delayed and more information was needed about one person’s diabetes treatment.
- Effective?
- Good
- People’s needs and choices were assessed before admission, and staff received training and supervision. The home worked with health professionals and supported people with eating, drinking, healthcare and legal consent arrangements.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. People and relatives were involved in decisions about care, including preferences about food, daily routines and the gender of care staff.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people’s individual needs and preferences. The home supported communication, cultural and social interests, end-of-life wishes and relationships, and had investigated and resolved the complaints it had received.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open culture, approachable management and systems for checking care quality and safety. People, relatives and staff were asked for feedback, and managers used audits and surveys to identify improvements.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with some staffing and fire-safety issues already being addressed.
This was the home’s first inspection since it registered in April 2022. It was an unannounced, planned inspection on 6 June 2023. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers, observed care, and checked records.
The inspectors found the home safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. People said they felt safe and received medicines on time. Staff understood people’s needs, supported their choices and provided kind care. Activities were based on people’s interests, and complaints had been investigated and resolved.
The home had enough staff at the inspection, although it had faced staffing challenges in recent months. A faulty fire door had taken time to repair but was fixed after inspectors raised it. Inspectors also said more information was needed about one person’s diabetes treatment. The overall rating was Good, meaning the inspectors found consistently good care and management.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe, and staff understood how to identify and report abuse. Risks such as falls, choking, malnutrition and moving and handling were assessed and reviewed.
“People told us they felt safe living at the home.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff supporting people with kindness and compassion. People’s privacy, dignity, independence, cultural needs and personal choices were respected.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff understood and responded to people's individual needs.” from the report
Personalised activities
Staff got to know people’s interests and used them to plan meaningful activities and experiences. The home offered both group activities and one-to-one support.
“The staff were able to use the information to evaluate whether it could accommodate activities and peoples dreams and make them happen.” from the report
Strong management checks
Managers used audits, meetings and surveys to monitor care and gather views. People, relatives and staff felt able to approach management with concerns.
“There was a strong and effective governance system in place.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff completed comprehensive training, an induction and supervised shadowing. They also received regular supervision and opportunities for further development.
“All staff completed a bespoke comprehensive competency-based training programme.” from the report
Delay repairing a fire door
minorA faulty fire door had not been repaired promptly. The issue was raised during the inspection and the home said it had then been repaired.
“There had been a delay regarding a faulty fire door that required repair.” from the report
Diabetes treatment information
needs fixingInspectors found that the protocol for one person with diabetes needed more information about their treatment. Families should ask how this was completed and checked.
“More information was required regarding their treatment.” from the report
- 01How have you maintained safe staffing levels while continuing to recruit and accept new residents?
- 02What information was added to the diabetes treatment protocol after the inspection, and who checks it?
- 03How do you make sure fire-safety repairs are completed promptly and followed up?
- 04How will you continue to plan activities around my relative’s interests and goals?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in reviewing their care plan?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 August 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.
Every inspection of Dearbourne Manor
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- August 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 April 2022.
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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Bristol, City of
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 £1,300 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She became a good friend to my mother in law, chatting with her, dancing with her, knitting with her and the list goes on”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.