CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Figbury Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care and better management, but the full safety rating was not reviewed.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 05 May 2021. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also reviewed care records, training information and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were all rated Good. Inspectors found improvements in care planning, staff training, consent, complaints handling and quality checks. People and relatives described the care as kind and the communication as good.
Safety was only partly checked. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, including protective equipment, testing, visiting and outbreak arrangements. They were assured by what they saw, but the overall Safe rating was not reviewed and remains not rated at this inspection.
The previous inspection had rated the home Requires Improvement and found several breaches. The report says the required improvements had been made and the home was no longer in breach of those regulations. The overall rating therefore changed to Good.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives consistently described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors also saw people being supported with dignity and independence.
“I couldn't wish for any better care, no matter who they are from the top to the bottom the staff are very kind and very caring” from the report
Improved care planning
Care plans had become more personalised and were reviewed when people's needs changed. Staff said the plans helped them understand what to do.
“Care plans have improved. They are so much better. You know what to do for people.” from the report
Skilled and supported staff
Staff had inductions, training and supervision. They said they felt confident supporting people with complex needs.
“Staff definitely have the skills and experience they need.” from the report
Strong management checks
The home used audits, daily meetings and an improvement plan to monitor care and follow up actions. Professionals described the home as organised.
“I feel Figbury Lodge is one of the most organised homes I work with.” from the report
Full safety assessment still outstanding
minorThe inspection did not reassess all parts of Safe. The report says this will be done at the next comprehensive inspection, so the Good overall rating does not mean every safety area was checked during this visit.
“We will assess all of the key question at the next comprehensive inspection of the service.” from the report
- 01What checks are currently being used to make sure staffing levels and staff training remain suitable for people's needs?
- 02How do you make sure consent is recorded and that decisions made for people who cannot decide for themselves are properly reviewed?
- 03How often are care plans reviewed, and how will you tell families when a person's needs or preferences change?
- 04When will the full Safe question be reassessed, and what evidence can you show that safety checks have continued since this inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led, with infection prevention and control checked under Safe; the full Safe rating was carried over and not reassessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 May 2021 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 2020
Figbury Lodge is rated Requires Improvement; safe care improved, but management systems and communication were not yet consistent.
Inspectors visited on 22 September 2020. This was a focused inspection following earlier concerns. They reviewed care, medicine and management records, spoke with people, relatives, staff and professionals, and checked infection control.
The safe rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good. Medicines and risk assessments were managed more safely. Staffing levels were judged adequate, although some staff felt there were times when they could not provide as much support as they wanted. Infection control arrangements for coronavirus were also judged effective.
The well-led rating remained Requires Improvement. New audits and monitoring systems had been introduced, but they were not fully established and there were still gaps in recording. Staff also said communication between management and staff needed to improve.
The overall rating remains Requires Improvement. It has been rated Requires Improvement at the last two inspections. No breaches were found in the areas checked at this inspection.
Safer medicines
Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Staff had training and their competence had been checked.
“Improvements had been made to the management of medicines and they were managed safely.” from the report
Clear risk plans
Risk assessments covered people's care needs and gave staff clear instructions. Records showed care was delivered in line with these plans.
“Risk assessments gave clear instructions for staff. Each assessment was arranged to show the care the person needed and what the risks were.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements for PPE, testing, shielding, social distancing and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Team support
Staff described improved morale and said they worked as a team. The manager was described as approachable and visible.
“There had been improvements to staff morale within the home. Staff worked as a team.” from the report
Management records not fully consistent
needs fixingNew monitoring systems had improved oversight, but they were not yet fully embedded. Inspectors found some gaps in recording and the manager had to adjust the process during the inspection.
“However, these improvements had not yet been fully embedded within the home as there were some gaps in recording.” from the report
Communication with staff
needs fixingSome staff felt communication from management still needed improvement. One staff member said their views were not always heard.
“Staff told us there had been many improvements at the home but felt that communication between management and staff still needed to be developed further.” from the report
Staffing pressure at times
needs fixingInspectors judged staffing levels adequate, but some staff said there were times when there were not enough staff to provide the level of support they wanted.
“However, some staff told us that they felt at times there were not enough staff to provide the level of support they wanted to.” from the report
- 01How are staffing levels checked when staff say they do not have enough time to provide the support they want to give?
- 02What recording gaps were found, and how will you check that the new recording process is now being followed consistently?
- 03How can staff raise concerns or suggestions, and how will you show that management has listened?
- 04What were the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive at the previous comprehensive inspection?
- 05What progress has been made since the previous inspection's warning notice and action plan?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection control; the other ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 October 2020 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 Figbury Lodge
3 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2021Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2020Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 September 2019.
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.