Eleanor Nursing Social Care Ltd- Poole Office is a domiciliary care service providing a regulated activity of personal care. The service was providing care and support to people in their own homes. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of this assessment, there were 94 people using the service. The inspection took place between 24 February and 25 February 2026. This was an announced inspection, and we included all the quality statements under each of the five key questions. The management of the service appreciated and celebrated their staff and had nurtured them to provide the best possible care to people. Recruitment and induction procedures were robust and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. A blended training programme meant staff had the necessary skills and knowledge to provide care. Safeguarding procedures were in place. The service learned from accidents, incidents and events. People had access to health and social care professionals to ensure their wellbeing was supported. People’s rights were fully respected. Staff were kind and caring, treating people with dignity, respect and were enthusiastic about their role. Partnership working was effective, and the service was passionate about working within their local community. There was confidence in the registered manager and management team. At the time of this inspection, Eleanor Nursing Social Care Ltd- Poole Office did not care or support for anyone with a learning disability or an autistic person. However, we assessed the care provision under Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture, as it is registered as a specialist service for this population group.
PDF cached but not yet analysed by Claude; set ANTHROPIC_API_KEY and re-run npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-1425811052.
Eleanor Nursing & Social Care Ltd - Poole Office was rated Good across all five key questions at its October 2018 inspection, with staff demonstrating kindness, effective risk management and strong person-centred practice. Minor concerns were noted regarding medicines audit documentation, a missed safeguarding referral during the registered manager's absence, and temporary staffing pressures over summer that affected rota consistency.
Concerns (3)
moderateStaffing levels: “Over the summer holiday period there had been pressures on staffing due to leave and sickness...Call times had changed, people had stopped receiving rotas and there was less continuity of staff.”
moderateSafeguarding: “An isolated potential safeguarding concern reported to a member of the office staff had not been acted upon.”
minorMedication management: “A sample of medicines administration records (MAR) returned to the office each month was audited, although these did not record what action had been taken if discrepancies were identified.”
Strengths
· People were treated with kindness and compassion; relatives and people using the service consistently praised staff as caring and respectful.
· Risks were assessed and managed effectively, with risk assessments reviewed at least annually or when circumstances changed.
· Staff were supported through regular training, supervision and appraisal every three months, including spot-check observations.
· Care plans were personalised, up to date and reflected people's physical, mental, emotional and social needs.
· Complaints were taken seriously and resolved promptly with appropriate action taken.
Eleanor Nursing and Social Care Ltd – Poole Office received a Good rating across all five key questions at its September 2015 inspection, demonstrating safe, personalised and well-monitored care for 130 people. Minor areas for improvement included a three-monthly lag in medicines recording audits and the absence of a formally registered manager at the time of inspection.
Concerns (3)
moderateMedication management: “We noted that there were some recording errors identified by these audits. This meant that there was a delay of three months before the provider would identify and address medicine errors.”
minorGovernance: “The service did not have a registered manager in post... the manager had applied to become the registered manager and was awaiting an interview date with the Care Quality Commission.”
minorIncident learning: “one member of staff told us that they did not always receive feedback from the management team about concerns that had been raised.”
Strengths
· Staff demonstrated good knowledge of safeguarding processes and were able to identify types of abuse and reporting routes.
· Personalised care plans with clear guidance for staff, including step-by-step instructions for complex needs such as epilepsy management.
· Consistent staffing allocation appreciated by people using the service; smart phone system monitored visit attendance in real time.
· Staff received regular supervision, competency checks, and individualised equipment training before starting care packages.
· Cultural and religious needs were recorded and respected, with people confirming staff understood their preferences.