CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Eastbury House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely and staff understood how to report abuse and incidents. The home was clean and equipment was regularly checked.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and assessed as competent. People had access to healthcare, suitable food, exercise and support that followed the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness and respect. People said they had choice and control, and inspectors saw that privacy and dignity were respected.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care was highly personalised and reflected people’s wishes, interests and histories. People were supported to stay active, avoid isolation, follow their faith and remain connected with their community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found experienced leadership, an open culture and systems for checking quality. People, relatives, staff and professionals spoke positively about how the home was managed.
What inspectors found, April 2018
Eastbury House was rated Good overall, with Outstanding responsive care and positive findings across safety, effectiveness, kindness and leadership.
Inspectors visited without notice on 4 January 2018. They spoke with people living in the home, visitors, staff and health professionals. They observed care, lunch and the home’s activities. They also checked care plans, medicines records, staff files and safety records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines procedures, trained staff, good access to healthcare and care that respected people’s choices, privacy and dignity.
Responsive care improved from Good to Outstanding. Inspectors found highly personalised support, a wide range of activities, strong links with the local community and support for people’s faith, relationships and end-of-life wishes.
The overall Good rating means the home met the expected standards at this inspection. It had one area judged to be better than this, but inspectors noted that people might sometimes wait a little longer for support at busy times.
Personalised care
Staff knew people’s preferences and adapted support when their circumstances changed. People were involved in their care plans and daily decisions.
“There was a real commitment to making sure all care was personalised to people's needs, wishes preferences and known lifestyle choices.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could take part in activities inside and outside the home. The programme was shaped around their interests, past experiences and wishes.
“People remained active members of their local community because they accessed local facilities and the home was open to member of the community.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw friendly and caring interactions. People said staff listened to them and respected their privacy, dignity and individuality.
“People received care which was kind and respected them as individuals.” from the report
Safe and effective care
The home had processes to manage risks, medicines, infection control and emergencies. Staff were trained and worked with health professionals to support people’s health.
“People received their medicines safely from staff who were trained and competent to carry out the task.” from the report
End-of-life support
People nearing the end of their lives had care plans and were supported with comfort, compassion and attention to their wishes. Relatives were involved in decisions.
“People could be confident that at the end of their lives they would be cared for with kindness and compassion and their comfort would be maintained.” from the report
Possible short waits at busy times
minorOne person said they might have to wait a little longer for support when staff were busy. Inspectors still found that staffing levels were adequate.
“I might have to wait a little longer at busy times, but not that long” from the report
- 01How do you make sure people receive timely help during busy periods or staff sickness?
- 02How would you tailor activities and outings to my relative’s interests, history and abilities?
- 03How are changes in my relative’s health or needs recorded and shared with all staff?
- 04How would you involve our family in planning and reviewing end-of-life care if it became necessary?
- 05How can residents and relatives raise concerns, and how are actions from complaints followed up?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating; the previous overall rating was Good and Responsive has since improved from Good to Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 April 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.
Every inspection of Eastbury House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- September 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 January 2011.
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.