CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Starboard House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks, staffing, medicines, equipment and infection control were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. The previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. The previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. The previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Management were visible and approachable. The home used regular audits, staff support and feedback systems to monitor and improve quality.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found people were safe, well supported and cared for by a well-managed home.
This was an unannounced inspection. One inspector visited on 26 April and 15 May 2023. They spoke with three people, the manager and three staff members. They also observed care and checked care, support and recruitment records.
The inspection looked at Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks were assessed and managed, there were enough trained staff, medicines were handled safely, and infection control arrangements were effective.
Inspectors also found visible management, regular checks on quality and good communication with families and other professionals. The overall rating was Good. The last overall rating was also Good, published on 8 March 2018.
The ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were not assessed during this inspection. Their previous ratings were used when calculating the overall rating.
Risk management
The home assessed risks linked to health, mobility, eating and drinking, finances and the environment. Staff had guidance about warning signs and how to respond.
“People lived safely and free from unwanted restrictions because the service assessed, monitored and managed risks to their safety.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Staff reviewed medicines regularly and followed processes for storing, administering and recording them. The home also followed the principles of avoiding unnecessary medicines to control behaviour.
“Staff followed effective processes to store medicines safely and to support people to take their medicines safely and in line with their preferences.” from the report
Enough trained staff
Inspectors found staffing levels and staff skills matched people's needs. Recruitment records included the required safety checks.
“The service had enough staff to support people safely and according to their needs and preferences.” from the report
Strong management
Managers were accessible and understood people's needs. Regular audits, reviews and partnership work were used to monitor care and improve the service.
“There were daily, weekly and monthly audits with the purpose of driving up quality.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and manage my relative's specific risks, including health, mobility, eating and drinking, or communication needs?
- 02How often will my relative's medicines be reviewed, and what alternatives will be tried before medicines are used to reduce anxiety?
- 03What emergency evacuation plan would be in place for my relative?
- 04How will my relative and our family be involved in reviewing their care and support plan?
- 05Which health and social care professionals would be involved if my relative's needs changed?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 July 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, March 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was a comprehensive, announced inspection on 14 December 2017. Inspectors observed care, spoke with a relative, the registered manager and staff, and checked care plans, medicines records, recruitment files and quality records.
The home supported six people with complex learning and physical disabilities, although it was registered for up to ten people. Inspectors found people were kept safe, medicines were managed properly, and staffing levels were suitable.
Care was personalised and respectful. People were involved in decisions, supported to communicate their choices, and helped to access activities and health services. Staff also had training for end of life care.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. It had also been rated Good at the previous inspection, so the rating remained unchanged.
Safe medicines and staffing
Inspectors found medicines were recorded, stored and given safely. Staffing levels were checked daily and extra staff were provided for outings when needed.
“People's medicines were recorded, stored and administered safely. Medicines administration records were completed accurately.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's abilities, likes and dislikes. Staff supported people to make choices and used communication aids where needed.
“People's care plans contained 'Things I am good at doing' books which detailed people's abilities, likes and dislikes.” from the report
Good involvement and activities
People were involved in planning their support and outings. The home also provided ways for people to express their views and raise concerns.
“Staff had involved people in a 'you said, we did' exercise to plan outings according to people's preferences.” from the report
End of life planning
People were consulted about their wishes for end of life care. All staff had completed specialist training for this support.
“People were consulted about their wishes for care when they approached the end of their lives.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used surveys, audits and an improvement plan to identify changes. Inspectors found examples of improvements made following feedback.
“Results from the quality assurance survey were used to inform the service improvement plan which identified actions for improvement.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and record my relative's individual needs, abilities, likes and dislikes?
- 02How will you help my relative communicate choices and take part in decisions about their care?
- 03How do you check that medicines remain safely recorded, stored and administered?
- 04What activities and outings could my relative take part in, based on their preferences?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in planning end of life care if needed?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and all five ratings were Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 March 2018 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 Starboard House
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 December 2010.
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
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Southampton
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 £980 to £1,350 a week. 39 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.