CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Beggars Roost Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control and visiting arrangements were safe and well managed.
The inspection took place on 12 May 2021 and was announced. It was a targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic, focused on infection prevention and control. At the time, 17 people were living in the home, which could care for up to 26 people.
Inspectors were assured that the home was supporting safe visits, using protective equipment properly, carrying out testing and following social distancing guidance. They also found that the premises were clean and odour free, with extra cleaning of frequently touched areas.
People could keep in touch with relatives using video and voice devices, and visitors could meet people inside or in the garden. Activities were available, including use of the accessible garden.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide a new overall rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Infection control
People said they felt safe with the infection prevention measures. The home had changed its layout to support distancing and had extra seating areas outside.
“People told us they felt safe with the infection control and prevention measures that were in place.” from the report
Protective equipment and testing
Protective equipment was readily available and staff used it appropriately. People and staff took part in regular whole-home COVID-19 testing.
“All people and staff participated in regular whole home testing for Covid 19.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the premises clean and without unpleasant smells. Extra cleaning included regular sanitisation of frequently touched areas.
“There was an enhanced cleaning regime in place which included regular sanitisation of high touch areas.” from the report
Contact with relatives
People were supported to keep in touch with relatives using technology. Visits were provided indoors or in the garden, depending on people's preferences.
“People had been supported to stay in touch with relatives using technology such as video and voice activated devices.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now?
- 02How are visits arranged now, and can relatives meet indoors and outdoors?
- 03How often are people living here and staff tested for infections?
- 04How is protective equipment supplied and checked to make sure it is used safely?
- 05What activities and ways of keeping in touch with relatives are available now?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was inspected but not rated and did not provide a full assessment of all five areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 May 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.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found infection-control risks and a breach of Regulation 12.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 26 November 2020. It followed concerns about infection prevention and control and took place out of hours.
Inspectors found some good arrangements, including testing, safe admissions and plans for visiting relatives. However, staff did not always follow infection-control procedures. They found problems with entry routes, isolation arrangements, protective equipment and staff training.
The home took some immediate action during and after the inspection. The report says the service was in breach of Regulation 12, which concerns safe care and treatment. The overall service and Safe rating were both recorded as inspected but not rated.
Safer family visiting
The home was building outdoor visiting rooms with heating, screens, outdoor access and arrangements for cleaning and ventilation between visits.
“The provider had purchased two outdoor buildings which were being built in the garden at the time of our inspection.” from the report
Support during isolation
Staff increased one-to-one time and used technology to help people keep in touch with relatives while isolated.
“Staff were aware of the impact isolation can have on the wellbeing of people and had thought of creative ways to address this.” from the report
Regular testing
During an outbreak, staff were tested twice a week and people weekly. People were also checked twice a day for symptoms or changes in physical health.
“During an outbreak of COVID-19 the registered manager increased the frequency of testing for staff and people.” from the report
Entry and hand cleaning
seriousStaff used different entrances without hand-cleaning facilities or a designated route to the changing area. The provider acted during the inspection by designating one entry and exit route and adding sanitiser.
“Staff were observed entering the home through different doors without access to hand cleaning facilities or designated route to the changing area.” from the report
Separation of people with COVID-19
seriousSome bedroom doors were open and rooms of people who had tested positive were mixed along the corridor with rooms of people who had tested negative. The provider said it would consider safer cohorting arrangements.
“some bedroom doors were left open, and rooms of people who had tested positive for COVID-19 were mixed in the corridor with the rooms of people who were negative.” from the report
Use and disposal of PPE
seriousStaff wore protective equipment but had not received specific training on putting it on, taking it off and disposing of it safely. Used equipment was found in communal areas and an unsuitable bin.
“We observed used PPE on a table in the communal lounge and gloves in a household waste bin.” from the report
Infection-control training
seriousStaff had not received recent COVID-19 infection-control training and did not always demonstrate safe practices. The manager later provided training updates and sought further resources.
“At the time of inspection staff had not received recent training for infection prevention and control specifically for COVID-19.” from the report
Cleaning records
minorThe home appeared clean and had daily cleaning schedules. However, there was no record showing that high-touch areas had been cleaned twice daily.
“there was no recording that this had been completed.” from the report
- 01What evidence can you show that all staff have completed the planned PPE and COVID-19 infection-control training?
- 02How do you now ensure that every person entering the home uses the correct entrance, hand-cleaning facilities and changing route?
- 03How are people who test positive for COVID-19 separated from people who test negative?
- 04How do you check that staff follow visiting and infection-control procedures every time?
- 05How are high-touch cleaning tasks recorded and checked?
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under Safe; the overall service and Safe ratings were not given. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 January 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 Beggars Roost Nursing Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
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 £1,020 to £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.