CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at St Anne's Court
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, February 2022
St Anne's Court: inspectors were assured about infection control, but this targeted inspection was not rated.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 28 January 2022. This was a targeted inspection during the COVID-19 pandemic. They looked mainly at infection control, visiting arrangements and whether staffing pressures were affecting care.
The inspectors found safe arrangements for visitors, including testing, temperature checks, hand cleaning and health checks. They were assured that the home was using protective equipment correctly, managing isolation, testing people and staff, and keeping its infection control policy up to date.
People spoke positively about their care and contact with relatives. Inspectors saw kind interactions between staff, managers and people living at the home. The home was clean, and staff had training in infection prevention and the use of protective equipment.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a full quality rating for the home or a rated result for the five questions.
Kind treatment
People spoke positively about their care and said they were treated with affection. Inspectors also saw caring interactions in the home.
“People told us they were treated with affection, we observed many caring interactions between the manager, staff and people which contributed to the atmosphere of the home.” from the report
Infection control
The home had arrangements for visitor checks, testing, isolation and protective equipment. Inspectors said staff were using protective equipment correctly.
“Supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE) were in good supply and we observed staff wearing this correctly.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean. Cleaning included frequent attention to high-use areas and regular deep cleaning of bedrooms.
“The home was a good standard of cleanliness. At the start of the pandemic St Anne's Court worked to provide 'care' training to other disciplines of staff” from the report
Support for family contact
People said staff helped them keep important contact with their loved ones during the pandemic.
“People told us they were supported to maintain vital contact with their loved ones.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently managing staffing pressures, and what impact could staff shortages have on my relative's care?
- 02What infection control checks are currently required for visitors and visiting professionals?
- 03How do you support people to maintain contact with their relatives when infection control restrictions are in place?
- 04How often are high-use areas and bedrooms cleaned, and how do you check that this is done?
- 05How do you make sure staff remain trained in infection prevention and the safe use of protective equipment?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 February 2022 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, April 2019
St Anne's Court was rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but some records were not always accurate.
This was an unannounced planned inspection. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, visitors, managers and staff. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, monitoring charts, audits and safety checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and were supported by a consistent staff team. Inspectors found that care was compassionate, respectful and tailored to people's needs.
There were some recording problems. Risk management records, records for topical medicines and other records were not always accurate or complete. The senior team addressed these issues immediately and explained actions being taken to improve recording.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff knew how to recognise and report abuse. Staffing levels were considered sufficient and the staff team was consistent.
“People told us they felt safe, they were relaxed and familiar with the staff and each other.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were described as friendly, attentive and respectful. People were supported to make choices and keep their dignity and independence.
“Staff supported people in a kind, calm way. They responded to requests and offered reassurance appropriately.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences and assessed needs. Staff knew people well and adapted support, including food choices and communication.
“Care plans were personalised and provided details of how to support people to meet their individual preferences and assessed needs.” from the report
Good support with food and health
People received support to eat and drink when needed, and could request preferred dishes. Staff helped people access health and social care professionals.
“People were supported as needed to eat and drink and there were systems in place to ensure any changes to people's eating were picked up and acted on appropriately.” from the report
Open management
The management team encouraged feedback from people, visitors and staff. Audits and discussions with other professionals supported improvements.
“The registered manager/owner and the senior team had a clear vision of a homely environment where people received high quality care that reflected their individual preferences” from the report
Risk records were not always complete
needs fixingSome recording linked to risk management was not robust enough to show whether care should be changed. The senior team addressed this immediately.
“The recording related to risk management was not always robust.” from the report
Topical medicine records were inaccurate
needs fixingRecords for topical medicines were not always accurate, although staff said the medicines had been applied and people showed no signs of harm. The senior team addressed this immediately.
“The recording of topical medicines was not always accurate.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made since the inspection to ensure risk management records are complete and up to date?
- 02How do you check that topical medicines are applied and recorded accurately?
- 03How do you make sure care plans and daily records remain accurate when people's needs change?
- 04How would you provide end of life care, given that nobody was receiving it during the inspection?
- 05How are people's feedback and complaints used to make improvements?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the overall Good rating was unchanged from the previous focused inspection published in May 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 April 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 St Anne's Court
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Good
- October 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 April 2013.
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.