The Pines
- Care home
- 12 beds
- No nursing
- Registered since 2011
- Fornham St Martin, Suffolk, East of England
Good
Rated on
Rating from the Care Quality Commission.
At a glance
3 ratings
First rated Requires improvement in 2016, most recently Good in July 2025.
15 months
since the latest rating was published.
109 of 156
rated care homes in Suffolk are rated Good, like this one.
The Pines: inspection record
Rated Good in July 2025.
| 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | ||||||||||||
| Safe | ||||||||||||
| Effective | ||||||||||||
| Caring | ||||||||||||
| Responsive | ||||||||||||
| Well-led |
Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.
Compare nearby
- G Fornham House Residential Home Good, 0.2 miles away
- RI Marham House Care Home Requires improvement, 1.1 miles away
- G Cedar Lodge Good, 1.5 miles away
- RI North Court Care Home Requires improvement, 1.7 miles away
- – Abbeygate Manor Not yet rated, 1.8 miles away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 29 July 2025 (assessment visit 22 May 2025). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
We visited the service on 4, 5 and 16 June 2025. An adult social care inspector undertook the visits on 4 and 16 June 2025, and a medicine inspector on 5 June 2025. We gave the service 2 hours’ notice of the inspection, as the service was small we needed to know people and staff would be in the service.
- Safe Good
- Effective Good
- Caring Good
- Responsive Good
- Well-led Good
Read the rest of CQC's summary
The service is a residential care home service providing support for up to 12 adults of all ages with learning disabilities and/or autistic people. During our inspection there were 11 people using the service.
We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.
The provider had a learning culture and people could raise concerns, which would be listened to, addressed and used to drive improvement. Incidents and accidents were monitored. Risks were assessed and mitigated and systems were in place to reduce abuse and avoidable harm. The facilities and equipment met people’s needs, were clean, well-maintained and risks mitigated. Since our last inspection, the environment had been redecorated and refurbished, this was ongoing. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Staff received training and appraisals to support them to meet people’s needs. Staff managed medicines well and safely.
People were central to the care they received and were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. People had enough to eat and drink and were supported to make decisions to stay healthy. Staff worked with health and social care professionals involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. People had access to health professionals when needed and their health was monitored by staff. Staff listened to people’s choices and systems were in place to make sure people understood their care and support so they could give informed consent.
People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff promoted and protected people’s privacy and dignity. People were treated as individuals and their preferences were respected. People were supported to maintain relationships with family and friends. Staff responded to people’s requests for assistance in a timely way. The provider supported staff wellbeing.
People were involved in decisions about their care. The service was accessible, including the environment and the ways information was provided to people in formats which they could understand. People with protected characteristics were supported. People received fair and equal care and treatment. People had access to the community and were encouraged to play an active part in the community they lived in.
Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Staff told us they felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.
Prior to our assessment we received feedback from a commissioner of the service. During our inspection we spoke with the manager and two regional directors. The provider’s head of quality attended the inspection feedback via video call. We also spoke with the nominated individual on the telephone. We gained feedback from five staff members remotely electronically and by telephone. We reviewed the care records for four people who used the service and reviewed the medicine records for 11 people. We looked at staff training and recruitment records and records relating to governance and monitoring, including policies and procedures, audits, and incident records.
-
Safe
Good
Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.
At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.Systems were in place to keep people safe. Risks were assessed and mitigated as far as possible. Incidents and accidents were reviewed and monitored and lessons were learned when things went wrong. People were supported with their medicines safely. The environment was visibly clean and well maintained. Staff were provided with training they needed to meet people’s needs safely.
-
Effective
Good
Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.
At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.
Improvements had been made in the environment and an ongoing programme of refurbishment and redecoration was in place.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People’s needs were being assessed and they were supported to access other services, such as health care services, where required. People were supported to maintain healthy lives and their dietary and hydration needs were being assessed.
-
Caring
Good
Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
Staff communicated with people in a respectful and compassionate way. People’s privacy, dignity and independence were promoted and respected. People were treated as individuals and they were involved and consulted in the person-centred care they received.
-
Responsive
Good
Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.
At our last assessment this key question was rated good. At this assessment it remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.
People were central to the care they received and their care and support plans were tailor made to their individual and diverse needs. People’s choices were listened to. People had access to the local community and meaningful employment and activities. The risk of inequalities was being assessed and reduced. There was an accessible complaints procedure in place and people’s comments were listened to and addressed.
-
Well-led
Good
Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.
At our last assessment this key question was rated good. At this assessment it has remained good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.
There had been a change in management since our last assessment, we received feedback of how the manager was accessible and approachable. Governance systems supported the provider and management team to monitor the service, and to continuously improve and provide people with good quality care.
Questions to ask when you visit
- Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the home did about any points in it.
- Visit at different times of day, including a mealtime.
Registration details
- Registered manager
- Chloe Blanchard
- Registered with the CQC since
- What it provides
- Care home service without nursing
- Who it supports
- Learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)6 inspection reports, latest 2 February 2022. Latest assessment published 29 July 2025; the Care Quality Commission's newer assessments are published on its website rather than as reports.
The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.
Who runs it
- Ownership type
- Organisation
- Companies House number
- 04081379 (opens Companies House)
Consensus Support Services Limited runs 59 services in England, 13 of them in the East of England. 53 are rated Good or Outstanding, 3 are rated Requires improvement or Inadequate and 3 have no rating yet.
Other services run by Consensus Support Services Limited
- O Cheshire House Outstanding. Care home, Trafford, North West
- O Haydock House Outstanding. Care home, North Northamptonshire, East Midlands
- O Heatherington House Outstanding. Care home, North Northamptonshire, East Midlands
- O Holland House Outstanding. Care home, North Northamptonshire, East Midlands
See all 59 services run by Consensus Support Services Limited
Getting help from Suffolk County Council
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at Suffolk County Council
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 0800 917 1109, Monday to Friday, 8am to 5pm (excluding bank holidays)
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Suffolk County Council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does The Pines provide nursing care?
- No. The Care Quality Commission lists The Pines as a care home without nursing.
- How many beds does The Pines have?
- The Care Quality Commission's register lists 12 beds at The Pines.
- When was The Pines last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for The Pines was published on 29 July 2025.
- Who runs The Pines?
- The Pines is run by Consensus Support Services Limited. It runs 59 services in England, 13 of them in the East of England.
- What is The Pines's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 29 July 2025.
Contact
- Phone
- 01284 705062
- Address
- Culford Road, Fornham St Mary, IP28 6TN Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
- G Fornham House Residential Home Good, 0.2 miles away
- RI Marham House Care Home Requires improvement, 1.1 miles away
- G Cedar Lodge Good, 1.5 miles away
- RI North Court Care Home Requires improvement, 1.7 miles away
- – Abbeygate Manor Not yet rated, 1.8 miles away