CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Little Amberwood
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found personalised risk assessments, clear behaviour support plans, safe medicines systems, appropriate staffing and effective infection control. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse.
- Effective?
- Good
- Residents' needs were assessed with relatives and health professionals. Staff were trained and supported, and residents received help with food, independence, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Residents were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew their preferences and supported them to make choices and build independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. The home supported residents' communication needs, relationships, interests, community activities and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open and supportive culture, with effective quality checks and regular involvement of residents, relatives, staff and outside professionals.
What inspectors found, December 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care in a well-managed home.
This was the first full inspection since the home registered in 2020. One inspector visited on 3 and 4 November 2021. They met all four residents, observed care, spoke with staff, relatives and health professionals, and checked care, medicine, staffing and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that staff knew residents well and supported their choices, independence, relationships and community activities. Care plans and positive behaviour support plans gave staff clear guidance.
The home had safe systems for medicines, recruitment, risk assessment, infection control and learning from incidents. Residents received healthy food and support with healthcare. Relatives and professionals gave positive feedback about the care and management.
A Good rating means inspectors found the service met the expected standards in all five areas at this inspection. It does not mean that every part of the service was perfect.
Choice and independence
Staff supported residents to make choices about daily life, pursue interests and develop practical skills. The home also supported social inclusion and community activities.
“People were supported to make choices about their daily lives and do things they enjoyed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw relaxed and happy residents with staff who understood them well. Residents were treated as individuals, with their dignity, privacy and views respected.
“People were treated with respect, kindness and compassion and had built trusting, caring relationships with staff.” from the report
Clear behaviour support
Positive behaviour support plans explained residents' triggers and how staff should respond. Staff understood how to reduce anxiety and support people in the least restrictive way.
“They gave clear guidance for staff on what may trigger anxiety or incidents for each person and how to safely de-escalate a situation.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, given and disposed of safely. Staff had suitable training and their competence was checked.
“Medicines were safely managed, stored, administered and disposed of.” from the report
Strong partnership working
The home worked with relatives and health and social care professionals to assess needs, manage health changes and review care.
“The service worked collaboratively with healthcare professionals and specialists.” from the report
One view about staffing
minorOne staff member said the home needed one extra person, although inspectors found there were enough trained staff and that consistent cover was used.
“There are generally enough, we do need one extra person but we get the same agency person in for consistency…” from the report
- 01How would you adapt the care plan and positive behaviour support plan for my relative's individual triggers and communication needs?
- 02How many staff would support my relative at different times, and how would you cover sickness or holidays?
- 03How would you support my relative to make choices, build independence and take part in activities outside the home?
- 04How are relatives involved when care needs or health needs change?
- 05How would you support my relative to understand and make decisions about their care?
This was a first full inspection covering all five key questions, including the home's premises, care and infection prevention and control arrangements; the home did not provide nursing care. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 December 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, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and safe visiting arrangements during the pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 16 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control because of the coronavirus pandemic. The home supported four people at the time and was registered for up to four people under 65.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, social distancing, admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, cleaning and possible outbreaks safely. The home had risk assessments and an up-to-date infection prevention and control policy.
The home was clean and had increased cleaning of frequently touched surfaces. Staff had infection control training. The home also supported people to understand the pandemic, take part in activities and spend their days as they wished within the restrictions.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a full rating across all five areas.
Infection control
The home had enhanced cleaning, staff training and monitoring of cleaning records. Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed.
“The home was clean and hygienic and the cleaning programme had been enhanced to include two hourly cleaning of high touch point areas such as light switches and door handles.” from the report
Safe visiting
Visitors were screened and supported to visit safely. The home used risk assessments and options such as a screened visitors pod and window visits.
“There were temperature checks, health screening, hand sanitising and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).” from the report
Support during restrictions
Staff helped people understand the pandemic and supported activities while restrictions were in place. Inspectors noted that staff worked to help people spend their days as they wished.
“Staff had actively sought to provide and support activities for people including rearing baby chicks.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your infection prevention and control arrangements changed since the inspection in March 2021?
- 02How are visitors currently screened and supported to visit people safely?
- 03How often are frequently touched areas cleaned, and how are the cleaning records checked?
- 04How are individual risk assessments reviewed when a person's needs or circumstances change?
- 05What activities are available now, and how do you support each person to spend their day as they wish?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide a full rating of the service or assess the other four questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 March 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.
Every inspection of Little Amberwood
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- December 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 August 2020.
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.