CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Long Close Retirement Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care, but some environmental checks had not happened as planned.
This was an unannounced inspection on 14 July 2023. One inspector spoke with four people, five staff members and one health and social care professional. They also observed care and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
People said they felt safe and described the home as happy and homely. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, safe medicines systems, good infection control and clear assessments of people's risks. People were supported to make choices and staff understood how to work in their best interests.
Some utility checks had not taken place when planned. The provider and manager acted immediately to arrange them and said they would improve the checking system. The home was rated Good overall, with Safe and Well-led both rated Good. This was unchanged from the previous rating published in January 2019.
Safe medicines
People received their medicines as prescribed. Records were checked, staff were trained and medicine discrepancies were followed up.
“People received their medicines as prescribed. The home had arrangements for the ordering, storage, and disposal of medicines.” from the report
Continuity and atmosphere
Many staff had worked at the home for a long time. Feedback described a friendly atmosphere and people who were happy and well cared for.
“Residents are really happy here and well cared for. Staff are lovely and it's homely.” from the report
Choice and least restriction
Staff asked people how they wanted to receive their care and supported them to have choice and control.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests” from the report
Working with families
The home used meetings and surveys to involve people and relatives in how it operated.
“The home undertook satisfaction surveys for people and their relatives. The most recent survey showed positive results.” from the report
Missed environmental checks
needs fixingSome utility checks had not taken place as planned. The provider arranged the checks immediately and was asked to make sure future checks happen on time.
“some utilities checks had not taken place as planned.” from the report
Audits had missed the issue
needs fixingThe home's quality checks had not identified the missed environmental checks. The manager changed the monitoring system during the inspection.
“Quality assurance systems were in place; however they had not identified the shortfall found with environmental checks.” from the report
- 01Have all the utility and environmental checks that were missed now been completed, and when are the next checks due?
- 02How will the new monitoring system make sure environmental checks are not missed again?
- 03How are the personal emergency evacuation plans being developed, and are they now complete for each resident?
- 04What changes have been made to the audit programme, and what actions are still outstanding?
- 05How are people and relatives being involved in the review of the menus?
This inspection report gives ratings for Safe and Well-led and included infection prevention and control; it does not give new ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 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.
What inspectors found, January 2019
Long Close Retirement Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with minor record-keeping improvements needed.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 10 and 13 December 2018. Inspectors spoke with five people, three relatives, five staff members, the registered manager and the provider. They observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staff files and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, clean and well-maintained premises, suitable training, kind staff and personalised care. People were supported with food, health needs, activities and choices about their daily lives.
The home met all the fundamental standards. Inspectors noted two minor areas for improvement: recruitment forms did not ask for a full employment history, and checks on air mattresses were not routinely recorded. The overall Good rating continued from the previous inspection.
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's physical, emotional, mental and social needs. Staff understood people's routines, preferences and what mattered to them.
“People's care records contained information about their routines, preferences and what was important to them” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to keep people safe and meet their needs. Medicines were securely stored, checked and given by trained staff.
“There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure people remained safe and had the support they needed.” from the report
Homely environment
The home was clean, warm and comfortable, with adaptations for people with mobility difficulties. People had their own rooms with en-suite wet rooms.
“The service looked and felt very homely.” from the report
Good leadership and oversight
The manager, deputy manager and provider had organised responsibilities. Regular audits, surveys and meetings were used to monitor the service.
“There were organised systems of delegation between the registered manager, deputy manager and provider that kept the home running smoothly” from the report
Recruitment records
minorThe application form did not ask applicants to provide a full employment history. The manager agreed this needed improvement.
“The application form did not specify that a full employment history should be provided.” from the report
Equipment checks not recorded
needs fixingAir mattresses were checked each day and were working correctly, but the checks were not routinely written down. This could make it harder to confirm that checks had been completed.
“Air mattresses were checked at least daily to ensure they were functioning properly and were correctly adjusted for the person's weight, although the checks were not routinely documented.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure every job application includes a full employment history?
- 02How are daily air mattress checks recorded and reviewed?
- 03What staffing levels will be in place for my relative's needs, including at night?
- 04How will you involve my relative and our family in reviewing their care plan?
- 05What activities and community links would be available if my relative wanted to take part?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, and it also looked in detail at oral health support as part of a national review. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 January 2019 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 Long Close Retirement Home
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 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
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.