CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Laurels and Pine Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were being followed, including testing, protective equipment, visiting arrangements and infection outbreak management. The provider also said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 19 January 2022. Inspectors were responding to concerns about infection prevention and control and asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
Inspectors found the building visibly clean. They were assured that the home was managing visitors, testing, personal protective equipment, distancing, admissions and infection outbreaks safely. Staff and visitors followed mask and testing arrangements, and supplies of protective equipment were available.
The home was improving its facilities, including installing new wet rooms and movement-sensor lighting. Some carpets, furniture and soft furnishings were becoming shabby, but a replacement programme was under way.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not provide an overall quality rating or ratings for most areas of care.
Clean premises
The home was visibly clean, and people living there and visitors said it was always kept clean.
“People who lived at the service and visitors told us the building was always kept clean.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements for protective equipment, testing, distancing, admissions and managing infection outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Communication with visitors
Visitors described communication as good. The home shared current visiting guidance and made some visits longer when possible.
“Visitors confirmed there was good communication.” from the report
Adapted facilities
New wet rooms meant people did not have to move between floors to shower. Whiteboards were available where masks made communication harder.
“New wet rooms had been installed so people did not have to move between floors in order to have a shower.” from the report
Worn furnishings
minorSome carpets, furniture and soft furnishings were becoming shabby. A replacement programme was under way, although the items were still intact.
“There was a programme under way for replacing some worn carpets, furniture and soft furnishings, which, although intact, were becoming shabby.” from the report
- 01How have your visiting, testing and protective equipment arrangements changed since the inspection on 19 January 2022?
- 02How do you currently manage staffing pressures linked to COVID-19 or other absences?
- 03Which carpets, furniture and soft furnishings still need replacing, and when will this work be completed?
- 04How do you support people with hearing difficulties or who speak a language other than English when staff are wearing masks?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with questions about COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 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, July 2021
Rated Good overall, but inspectors found the home was not always safe and rated Safe as Requires Improvement.
Inspectors visited without notice on 26 May 2021. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and a health professional. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff rotas, recruitment records, infection control information and quality checks.
The home was calm and welcoming. Staff knew people well and provided personalised care. Risk assessments, medicines arrangements, infection control and safeguarding systems were generally effective. Improvements had also been made to skin care, care records and staff recruitment.
There were still safety concerns about the uneven driveway and worn internal flooring. Nutrition and hydration records also needed further improvement. The home was rated Good overall, with Responsive and Well-led rated Good, but Safe remained Requires Improvement. Effective and Caring were not inspected during this focused visit, so previous ratings were used.
Personalised care
Care plans were detailed and reflected people's individual needs, choices and health conditions. Staff supported people to remain independent where possible.
“People received person centred care which suited their individual health needs and reflected their wishes and choices.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were stored securely and given by trained staff whose competence was checked regularly. Improvements from the previous inspection had been made.
“People's medicines were managed safely, stored securely and administered by trained staff.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home was using PPE safely, carrying out testing and following infection prevention guidance, including arrangements for visits.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Management improvements
The new management team had introduced action plans, audits and regular checks. Staff and professionals described the home as improving and felt able to raise concerns.
“There was an effective governance system that had recently been put in place.” from the report
Warm atmosphere
People, relatives and staff described a friendly home. Inspectors observed staff responding promptly and treating people with dignity.
“There was a calm, welcoming and friendly atmosphere at The Laurels and Pine Lodge.” from the report
Driveway and flooring
needs fixingThe driveway was uneven and had crumbled in places. Worn flooring and stained carpets could increase the risk of slips, trips and falls. The provider was seeking quotes, but work had not been scheduled.
“The driveway had subsided and crumbled in parts and had become very unlevel.” from the report
Nutrition and hydration records
needs fixingThe home had started making improvements, but inspectors said continued effort was needed to ensure records supported high-quality, person-centred care.
“We recommend the service maintains its efforts to improve people's nutrition and hydration to ensure people receive high quality person-centred care.” from the report
As-required medicines records
needs fixingRecords for medicines given when needed did not follow current guidance. Managers said they would change the practice immediately and amend the audit process.
“However, we noted that, 'as required' medicines were not recorded in line with current guidance.” from the report
Staff changes and recruitment
minorThere had been several staff changes and recruitment was continuing. The home had enough staff during the inspection, but it was using agency staff while new employees completed checks.
“The manager told us there had been a number of recent staff changes.” from the report
- 01When will the driveway and remaining worn flooring be repaired, and what checks are being made to reduce falls risks until the work is completed?
- 02How are you checking that nutrition and hydration records are complete and accurately reflect each person's needs?
- 03What has changed in the recording of 'as required' medicines, and how will audits confirm the new process is being followed?
- 04How many permanent care staff are currently in post, and how are agency staff being kept familiar with residents' needs?
- 05What activities are now available following the planned recruitment of an activities staff member?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led; Effective and Caring were not inspected and their previous ratings were used in calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 July 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 The Laurels and Pine Lodge
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2021Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 January 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.