CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Talbot View
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Talbot View was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection-control measures and kind, reassuring care.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 24 February 2022. Inspectors gave 24 hours’ notice and focused on infection prevention, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected the home.
Inspectors found safe arrangements for visitors, including rapid testing, protective equipment, health checks, hand hygiene and vaccination checks. They were assured that the home used protective equipment correctly, maintained cleanliness and had plans for outbreaks and staff shortages.
People told inspectors they felt safe and happy. Inspectors saw kind and caring interactions, and found that people were supported to keep in touch with relatives during the pandemic.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating, and it did not assess all areas of care.
Infection control
The home had supplies of protective equipment, monitored its use and kept the building clean and uncluttered. Cleaning schedules helped staff track hygiene work.
“The home was clean, tidy and free from clutter.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors were checked through testing, health and symptom checks, hand hygiene and protective equipment. Vaccination status was checked for visiting professionals.
“Safe practices were in place for welcoming visitors to the home.” from the report
Kind interactions
People said they felt safe and happy. Inspectors saw staff offering reassurance and comfort.
“We observed many kind and caring interactions between staff and people.” from the report
Contact with relatives
The home adapted its visiting arrangements as restrictions changed and communicated with people and relatives by phone, email and in person.
“People were supported to maintain contact with their loved ones during the COVID-19 pandemic.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What measures are currently in place if there are staffing shortages or COVID-19 pressures?
- 02How are visitors currently checked, and how are changes to visiting arrangements explained to relatives?
- 03How do you monitor staff use of protective equipment, hand washing and cleaning?
- 04How are people currently supported to keep in touch with relatives?
- 05How are infection outbreaks identified and managed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it was not a full assessment of all five key questions and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 March 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, August 2018
Talbot View was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with some management and record-keeping improvements still needed.
This was a comprehensive inspection on 15 and 17 May 2018. The first day was unannounced. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, visitors and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files, incident records and quality audits.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines management, kind care, suitable healthcare support and activities based on people's interests.
The home had a new manager who had applied to register with CQC. Inspectors also identified some improvements, including keeping nutrition care plans up to date, holding staff supervisions as often as required, checking bed rails and providing an additional activity coordinator.
Kind and respectful care
People were treated patiently and sensitively. Staff knew the people they supported and respected their privacy, dignity and independence.
“People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff knew and respected the people in their care.” from the report
Safe support
Risks were assessed and managed with as little restriction as possible. Staff supported people to keep moving and remain independent where this was safe.
“Risks to people were assessed and managed in the least restrictive way possible.” from the report
Personalised care
Care planning considered people's whole lives, including their histories, preferences, abilities and interests.
“People's physical, mental health and social needs were assessed holistically, and care was planned and delivered to meet these.” from the report
Good healthcare and nutrition support
The home arranged healthcare appointments and acted on professional advice. It monitored weights and sought specialist help where people were at risk of malnutrition or had swallowing difficulties.
“People had access to healthcare services and were supported to manage their health.” from the report
Staff supervision
needs fixingSupervisions had not always taken place as often as the provider's policy required. The new manager had started addressing this.
“The manager had recognised since arriving a few weeks before that supervision meetings were not always taking place as often as specified by the provider's supervision policy.” from the report
Nutrition records
needs fixingUpdated nutrition care plans were not always given to kitchen staff. Staff did communicate important information such as allergies and swallowing difficulties.
“Nutrition care plans were also made available to kitchen staff; new versions were not always provided when updated” from the report
Activities staffing
minorOne activity coordinator post was vacant when inspectors visited. Care staff were helping with activities while recruitment was under way.
“They were assisted by designated care staff as the other activity coordinator post was vacant, although recruitment to the vacant post was under way.” from the report
New manager registration
minorThe previous registered manager had left a few weeks earlier. The current manager had applied to register with CQC and was waiting for a fit person interview.
“They had applied to register with CQC and were awaiting a fit person interview.” from the report
- 01Has the current manager completed their CQC registration, and who is legally responsible for managing the home now?
- 02How often do staff receive supervision now, and how do you check that this follows the provider's policy?
- 03How do you make sure the kitchen receives the latest nutrition and swallowing care plans?
- 04Has the vacant activity coordinator post been filled, and what activities are currently available for residents?
- 05Have the identified checks on bed rails and slings been completed?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 August 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 Talbot View
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 November 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
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.