You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 22 August 2019

About the service

Dorset House is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care for up to 42 older people within one large adapted building. At the time of our inspection, there were 35 people living at the home.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were supported with their individual needs however care documentation was incomplete. This had the potential to result in people's needs not being responded to in a consistently personalised way. We made a recommendation about this.

People who lived at the home and their relatives were positive about the care and support provided by staff. The registered manager and their staff team worked in partnership with other health and social care professionals to provide responsive and continuous care to people.

People told us they felt safe at the home. Risks to people were managed without placing undue restrictions upon them. Staff were trained in recognising and understanding how to report potential abuse. Staffing arrangements were regularly reviewed by the registered manager to ensure these continually supported people's safety. Staff knew how to reduce the risks of infections.

Staff were recruited safely; they received regular support and training. New staff were provided with an induction which provided them with the relevant knowledge and skills for their roles. The registered manager reviewed staffing arrangements on a regular basis, so they could continually improve these when required to effectively meet people’s individual needs.

People were supported to receive their medicines and were happy with the arrangements in place for staff to assist them with their medicines. People we spoke with told us staff responded to their health needs. People were supported to eat and drink enough and had a choice as to where to eat their meals. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff always respected people’s privacy and dignity. People were supported to engage in things for fun and interest. The registered manager reviewed the opportunities people were offered to ensure they continued to be of interest and benefit to people.

Some information was in accessible formats and the registered manager was aware of broadening this out to further support the individual needs of people who lived at the home. People's concerns and complaints were listened and responded to.

Staff felt supported by their colleagues and the registered manager and spoke positively about the care they provided. They felt able to share issues and ideas to make improvements for the benefit of people who lived at the home.

There were quality assurance systems and processes in place to monitor and improve the quality and safety of people’s care. These had worked effectively to drive through the improvements following the last inspection. The registered manager would use their quality monitoring systems to make further improvements to people’s care documentation.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (report published on January 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection areas



Updated 22 August 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 22 August 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 22 August 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 22 August 2019

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.



Updated 22 August 2019

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.