CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Clements House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Inspectors found comprehensive risk assessments, safe medicines management, suitable staffing and checks on recruitment, equipment and fire safety.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training, regular supervision and support from managers. People's nutritional and health needs were assessed, and staff worked with mental health and other health services.
- Caring?
- Good
- People described staff as friendly, caring and professional. People were involved in decisions, and staff respected privacy, choice, independence and equality.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was planned around individual needs and reviewed regularly. People were supported with independent living skills, activities, communication needs and access to community facilities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a clear, person-centred approach and staff worked well with other agencies. Regular audits, meetings and surveys were used to monitor quality and gather people's views.
What inspectors found, September 2018
Clements House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some wear and tear to address.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 13 September 2018. The inspector spoke with people living at the home, staff, managers and a mental health professional. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff records, complaints, accidents and quality checks.
The home supported six people and could care for up to seven. People said they felt safe, liked the food and received the support they needed. Inspectors found good systems for safeguarding, risk management, medicines, staffing, training and working with health services.
People were involved in their care and daily routines. Staff supported independence, including cooking, budgeting, education, activities and use of community facilities. Inspectors also found that staff were respectful, caring and responsive to people's mental health needs.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as at the previous inspection, and the report found no serious risks or concerns.
Safe support
Inspectors found detailed risk assessments and clear arrangements for responding to incidents, emergencies and people's changing needs.
“There were comprehensive assessments of risks to people and to others.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff received a broad range of training, regular supervision and support to develop their skills in mental health and care.
“There was a system for staff to develop their skills and knowledge by a comprehensive training programme.” from the report
Building independence
People took part in cooking, cleaning, budgeting, education and activities to develop daily living skills and independence.
“People were supported to develop independent living skills such as with cooking, budgeting finances and attended college courses.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked with mental health, hospital and other services to coordinate people's care.
“The provider and staff liaised well with health care services.” from the report
Repairs and maintenance
minorInspectors saw some wear and tear, including damaged hallway flooring and mildew around one shower tray. The registered manager said there was a system for reporting repairs and that these issues would be addressed.
“We noted some areas of the home were showing signs of wear and tear.” from the report
- 01Have the damaged hallway flooring and mildew around the shower tray been repaired, and how do you check that repairs are completed?
- 02How is staffing adjusted when a person's needs change, and what support is available overnight when one staff member is on duty?
- 03How will you support my relative to develop cooking, budgeting and other independent living skills?
- 04How do you review medicines records and make sure medicines continue to be given as prescribed?
- 05How can my relative or family raise a complaint, and how will we be kept informed about the outcome?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five questions: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 September 2018 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 Clements House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 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.