CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Freelands Croft Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors checked infection prevention and control and deprivation of liberty safeguards. They were assured about these areas, but said the whole Safe question would be assessed at the next comprehensive inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not part of the focused inspection and the report does not give a current rating for it.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not part of the focused inspection and the report does not give a current rating for it.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and individual. They covered people's needs, risks, communication, choices, activities and family relationships.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found positive leadership, good communication, staff involvement and quality checks that identified improvements.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Freelands Croft Care Home is rated Good; inspectors found personalised care and strong management, but this was a focused inspection and Safe was not fully rated.
Two inspectors made an unannounced visit on 12 April 2022. They observed care, spoke with four people, nine staff members and a healthcare professional, and checked care records and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Inspectors found detailed care plans, support that reflected people's choices, good family contact and activities, and a positive management culture. They were also assured about infection control and legal safeguards for people who could not make some decisions themselves.
This was a focused inspection. It looked mainly at Responsive and Well-led, both rated Good. Safe was inspected only for infection control and deprivation of liberty safeguards, so it was not rated in full. The overall rating stayed Good, as the previous rating was also Good.
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's needs, risks, choices and preferences. Staff knew how to support physical, mental and emotional needs.
“People received effective care and support based on care plans which were detailed, individual and recorded people's choices and preferences.” from the report
Family contact and activities
The home supported family relationships through visits and video calls. Activities were linked to each person's interests and recorded their effect on mood.
“Activities were linked to people's interests and aspirations.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements for preventing and managing infections, including using protective equipment and testing.
“We were assured the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Positive leadership
Inspectors found approachable leaders, good communication and a positive atmosphere. Staff said they felt supported and could share their views.
“The atmosphere in the home on the day of our visit was up-beat and positive.” from the report
Quality improvement
Regular audits covered areas such as medicines, nutrition, wellbeing and person-centred care. Actions were tracked through an improvement plan.
“There were robust quality assurance processes which identified current and potential concerns, and areas for improvement.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01The inspection did not fully assess Safe. How are you currently checking risks such as falls, pressure injuries, blood-thinning medicines and diabetes?
- 02How do you make sure care plans are updated when a person's needs change?
- 03Have the planned computer systems for care planning and medicines management, and the new call bell system, now been introduced?
- 04How will my relative and our family be involved in care plan reviews and activities?
- 05What is the current process for raising a complaint, and how do you use complaints to make improvements?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Responsive and Well-led, with checks of infection prevention and control and deprivation of liberty safeguards; the full Safe question and the other questions were not inspected and the overall rating used earlier ratings where needed. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 May 2022 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, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured the home had infection prevention and control measures in place.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 3 March 2021. It focused on how the home prevented and controlled infections during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements for visitors, social distancing, admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, cleaning and managing outbreaks.
The home had adapted its layout and updated its infection control policies. Staff also had extra support, including confidential counselling and a hardship fund.
The home was inspected but not rated. This visit does not give a full rating of the quality of care or of all five CQC questions.
Safe visiting arrangements
The home had arrangements for people to receive visitors safely in their rooms. It also provided a visiting pod for people who wanted to be more cautious.
“There were protocols and procedures in place to allow people to receive a visitor safely in their room” from the report
PPE and specialist support
Extra PPE and training were available for staff supporting someone using CPAP therapy, where infection could spread through airborne droplets.
“Enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE) and associated training were available for staff who supported a person who used continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy” from the report
Adapted environment
The home changed its layout and use of rooms to support infection control. Some hard-to-clean furniture was removed and remaining furniture was spaced out.
“The provider had made adaptations to the home to make it easier to support people safely during the pandemic.” from the report
Staff support
Staff had access to confidential counselling and a hardship fund. Inspectors reported that staff morale was high and staff felt well supported.
“Staff morale was high, and staff felt they had been supported well by the provider.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your infection prevention and control arrangements changed since the inspection on 3 March 2021?
- 02What visiting arrangements are currently in place, including visits in residents' rooms and use of the visiting pod?
- 03How do you provide PPE and training for staff supporting people who use CPAP therapy?
- 04How do you test new residents, existing residents and staff, and how would you manage an infection outbreak?
- 05What recent inspection or assessment covers care quality areas that were not rated in this report?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; the home was inspected but not rated and the other questions were not covered. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 March 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 Freelands Croft Care Home
6 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2019Goodstayed GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2016Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 March 2011.
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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.