CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Larks Leas
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Inspectors found personalised risk assessments, enough staff, safe recruitment and medicines given on time and as prescribed.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received support with healthcare, nutrition and communication. Staff had relevant training, although some mental capacity paperwork needed more detail.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind, caring and patient. Staff respected privacy, personal choices, cultural needs and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's needs, preferences and life histories. People had activities, communication support and help to maintain relationships.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an approachable management team, regular audits and opportunities for people, relatives and staff to give feedback.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some mental capacity paperwork needing more detail.
This was an unannounced inspection on 2 and 3 January 2020. One inspector spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and a visiting professional. They observed care, looked around the home and checked care, medicine, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable support with eating and healthcare, and staff who were kind and respectful.
Care was personalised and people were supported to make choices, stay independent and keep in touch with family and friends. The home had activities, complaint arrangements and links with local community organisations.
Inspectors found that some mental capacity and best interest paperwork did not explain the exact decisions considered in enough detail. The manager put an action plan in place straight away. The overall rating stayed Good.
Enough staff
Inspectors found there were enough staff to meet people's needs promptly and flexibly. Staffing levels were reviewed as people's needs or occupancy changed.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs in a timely and flexible way.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors observed patient and attentive interactions that respected people's dignity and individual needs.
“People told us staff treated them well with a kind and patient approach.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs, abilities, life histories and preferences. Staff supported people to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“People received person-centred care.” from the report
Good food and health support
Dietary needs were known and met, including allergies and safe swallowing plans. The home monitored weight and sought medical advice when people had poor dietary intake.
“Records and our observations confirmed people's dietary needs were known and met” from the report
Open management
Staff, people and relatives described the manager as approachable and willing to listen. Regular meetings, surveys and audits were used to review the service.
“The registered manager was seen by staff, people and relatives as approachable and someone always keen to listen and resolve issues wherever possible.” from the report
Mental capacity records
needs fixingMental capacity assessments and best interest meetings had taken place, but the paperwork did not give enough detail about the exact decisions considered. The manager put an immediate action plan in place.
“Mental capacity assessments and best interest meetings had taken place, with involvement of all relevant parties, but the paperwork needed more detail about the exact decisions that were considered.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to mental capacity and best interest records after the inspection?
- 02How do you make sure care plans are updated when a person's needs or preferences change?
- 03How do you provide activities for people who stay in their rooms or prefer one-to-one support?
- 04How are staffing levels decided when people's needs or the number of residents changes?
- 05How are relatives involved in care reviews and decisions about a person's support?
This was an unannounced, planned inspection that covered all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home environment. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 January 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.
What inspectors found, July 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some records needing better review.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 15 May 2017. They spoke with nine people, seven staff and the manager, and observed care. They also checked records, medicines, training and the provider's quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe and were happy with the care. Staff knew people's needs, preferences and life histories.
Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable food choices and access to health professionals. Care was personalised and activities were available. The service had a complaints process and quality checks.
There were some areas to improve. Three best-interest decisions had not been reviewed for some time, and care records did not clearly show that people had been included in reviews. There was no registered manager at the visit, although a manager had been appointed and was applying for registration.
Kind and respectful care
People told inspectors that staff were helpful and respectful. Inspectors saw warm, calm and compassionate interactions.
“People were cared for by kind and caring staff who went out of their way to help people and promote their well-being.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, given and recorded safely. Staff had training and people said their medicines arrived on time.
“The medicines were stored and administered safely. The people we spoke with told us they always receive their medication on time.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and personal histories. Staff understood how each person wanted to be supported.
“Care plans were personalised to each individual and contained information to enable staff to provide consistent support.” from the report
Activities and choice
People had choices about meals and daily life. The home offered group and individual activities linked to people's interests.
“A programme of meaningful activities was in place.” from the report
Best-interest reviews
needs fixingThree records of best-interest decisions had not been reviewed for some time. The manager said this was being addressed through a management plan.
“We looked at the recording for three BIDs that had been made and noted that these had not been reviewed for some time.” from the report
Care review records
needs fixingCare reviews took place monthly, but the records did not clearly show that people had been included. The manager agreed that recording people's wishes would improve the process.
“However the records did not clearly evidence that people had been included in their reviews.” from the report
Registered manager
minorThere was no registered manager in post at the inspection. A new manager had been appointed and was applying for registration, while working part time during a transition.
“At the time of the inspection there was no registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01Have the three best-interest decisions mentioned in the report now been reviewed?
- 02How do you record that residents or their representatives have been included in care plan reviews?
- 03Is the manager now registered with the CQC, and who has overall responsibility if not?
- 04How are staffing levels adjusted when people need extra support, or when staff are away?
- 05What activities are currently offered to match each resident's interests and abilities?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and covered all five CQC questions, with Good ratings in each. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 July 2017 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 Larks Leas
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 March 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.