CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Stour Road Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People had detailed risk assessments and staff understood how to protect them from harm. Medicines, recruitment, fire safety and infection control were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- The report does not give a separate rating or detailed findings for Effective.
- Caring?
- Good
- The report does not give a separate rating for Caring, although it says staff knew people well and encouraged them to live good lives.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and reflected people's preferences, communication needs and relationships. Activities had improved, but meaningful social engagement was not yet consistent.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Audits and management systems were effective. Staff felt included and supported, and the home worked with external organisations.
What inspectors found, July 2022
Stour Road Care Home is Rated Good; inspectors found safe, personalised care, but activities were not yet consistently meaningful.
Two inspectors carried out an unannounced visit on 28 June 2022. They spoke with 10 people, 14 staff and health and social care professionals. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Responsive and Well-led were each rated Good. People were protected from abuse, medicines were managed safely, risk assessments were detailed and staff knew people well.
Care plans had improved since the last inspection and were generally detailed. However, activities and social engagement were not yet consistent, so the inspectors made a recommendation. Information about some health conditions was not person-specific, but this was raised and corrected immediately.
The previous overall rating was also Good, published on 24 March 2021. The Responsive rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good.
Detailed risk planning
Risk assessments covered people's care and support needs, including emotional distress. Staff discussed risks during handovers and knew how to act.
“Risk assessments were clear and detailed, especially for those who needed support due to emotional distress.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
People received medicines as prescribed. Staff were trained and assessed, and records and storage arrangements were checked.
“People received their medicines as prescribed, staff who gave medicines were trained and had their competency assessed.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans described people's needs, abilities, preferences and desired outcomes. They were reviewed regularly and involved health professionals and families where appropriate.
“People had detailed plans in place for all aspects of the care and support.” from the report
Effective management checks
The home used audits and action plans to identify and address issues. Inspectors found evidence of ongoing learning and improvement.
“Quality assurance systems in place were robust and effective in managing the risks to the quality of the service.” from the report
Activities were not consistent
needs fixingActivities had improved, but the inspectors said meaningful social engagement was not yet consistent throughout the home. They recommended further development of the activity programme.
“We recommend the provider develops their activity programme to ensure that meaningful social engagement is consistent throughout the service.” from the report
Some health information was not personalised
minorInformation about specific health conditions was not always tailored to the individual. The manager arranged a review and corrected the omission immediately.
“However, where information was given regarding specific health conditions this was not always personalised.” from the report
Recruitment was ongoing
minorThe home had enough staff at the inspection, but unplanned sickness affected the day at times and recruitment continued because of staff shortages.
“Recruitment was ongoing, the home was experiencing challenges, as many other providers were, due to the national shortage of workers in the care sector.” from the report
- 01What activities are now available each week, and how do you make sure they match each person's interests?
- 02How do you record and review information about my relative's specific health conditions?
- 03How many staff are usually on duty, and how do you cover sickness or vacancies?
- 04How are risk assessments and care plans updated when my relative's needs change?
- 05How can families raise concerns, and how will we be told what action has been taken?
This inspection rated Safe, Responsive and Well-led; the report does not give separate ratings for Effective or Caring. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 July 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, March 2021
Stour Road Care Home is rated Good; inspectors found improved safety and leadership after earlier breaches, with no current breaches.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 5 March 2021. Inspectors checked whether earlier problems with safety, staff recruitment and management systems had been fixed. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and community nurses, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found better infection control, fire safety checks, staff recruitment and quality monitoring. They found enough staff, safe medicines practice and systems to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm.
The overall rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were carried forward. The report says the home was no longer in breach of regulations.
Infection and fire safety
Cleaning checks were being completed, infection control procedures had been reviewed and fire safety actions were dealt with promptly.
“Fire safety checks had been completed in line with the fire safety schedule and records demonstrated that any identified actions were dealt with appropriately and in a timely manner.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels allowed people to receive safe, person-centred care, including time with staff when needed.
“Staffing levels ensured people received safe, person centred care.” from the report
Safe medicines
Trained staff administered medicines safely and had regular checks of their skills. Extra training had been provided for a medicine needed for a particular health condition.
“People had their medicines administered safely by trained staff who had their competencies checked regularly.” from the report
Improved management checks
The home had introduced new audits, regular meetings and more oversight of risks and legal requirements.
“Auditing processes had been reviewed and changes included introducing new audit tools more aligned to best practice.” from the report
Family involvement
During Covid-19 restrictions, families could keep in touch through video calls, telephone calls, emails and newsletters.
“A range of other options had been introduced including video calls, regular email or telephone call updates.” from the report
No registered manager in post
minorA registered manager had not been in post for four months. The current manager had applied to CQC for registration.
“A registered manager had not been in post for four months.” from the report
- 01What is the current position on the manager's CQC registration application?
- 02How are cleaning schedules and infection control checks monitored now?
- 03How often are fire safety checks carried out, and how quickly are any actions completed?
- 04How do you check that new staff have the required recruitment checks before starting work?
- 05What changes were made after reviewing falls, and are those changes still in place?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 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 Stour Road Care Home
7 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- July 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 April 2019.
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.