CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Hurst Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People's risks were assessed and managed. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines arrangements and effective infection prevention measures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff knew people's preferences and supported their privacy, independence, communication and choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The registered manager was visible and approachable, and governance systems had improved. People, relatives and staff gave generally positive feedback about the management and culture.
What inspectors found, June 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 6 June 2023. Two inspectors spoke with 7 people, 5 relatives and 8 staff. They observed care and checked care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Caring and Well-led were all rated Good. Inspectors found people were generally happy, felt safe and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew people well and care was adapted to their needs.
The previous inspection rated the home Requires Improvement and found a breach of Regulation 10 about dignity and respect. Inspectors found enough improvement had been made and the home was no longer in breach. The overall rating changed to Good.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff understood how to recognise and report abuse. Risks to people's health and the environment were assessed and managed.
“People were kept safe from avoidable harm because staff knew them well and understood how to protect them from abuse.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff supported people with dignity and privacy. Inspectors saw respectful communication and found that people were involved in choices about their care.
“People received good care from staff who knew them well.” from the report
Improved management
The home had improved its monitoring and records since the previous inspection. The manager was approachable, and staff described a positive team culture.
“Improvements had been made to systems and process that monitored the quality of the service being delivered and accuracy of records.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were stored and administered safely, with staff training and regular checks.
“Medicines were managed safely in line with national guidance.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found all areas clean and fresh. The service had effective infection prevention arrangements and a food hygiene rating of level 5.
“The service employed staff to clean the home and we found all areas clean and fresh during the inspection.” from the report
One medicine record
minorInspectors saw one example where the recording of a person's medicine did not follow best practice. The manager and provider addressed this with the nurse during the inspection.
“We observed a deviation from best practice recording in the administration of 1 person's medicine.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure medicine administration records are completed correctly every time?
- 02What changes were made after the previous breach relating to people's dignity and respect?
- 03What are the current ratings for Effective and Responsive, which were not inspected during this visit?
- 04How do you use audits and incident reviews to identify and fix shortfalls?
- 05How are people's preferred times, communication needs and personal care choices recorded and followed?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Caring and Well-led only; the ratings for Effective and Responsive were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 June 2023 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, July 2022
Hurst Nursing Home was rated Requires Improvement; care was safe and effective, but dignity, privacy and management oversight were not always good enough.
Inspectors visited unannounced on 24 and 25 May 2022. They spoke with seven people, six relatives and seven staff. They reviewed care, medicines, staffing, training, records and the home’s management systems.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Responsive. Inspectors found improvements in risk assessments, care plans and medicines management. There were enough trained staff, and people generally received suitable food, healthcare and activities.
Caring and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors saw problems with privacy, personal hygiene, appearance, comfort and how some people’s choices were respected. The home breached Regulation 10 because people were not always treated with dignity and respect.
The overall rating remained Requires Improvement. The home had improved since the previous inspection and was no longer in breach of Regulations 12 and 17. However, inspectors said management oversight had not reliably identified or prevented the dignity concerns.
Safer care planning
Risk assessments and care plans were updated to reflect individual needs, with clear actions for staff to reduce risks.
“Since the last inspection, the registered manager had updated care plans to ensure individual risks had been identified.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were given as prescribed. The home had improved its guidance for medicines given when needed and checked medicines records.
“Medicines were given correctly in the way they had been prescribed.” from the report
Staffing and training
Inspectors found enough staff with appropriate skills. Recruitment checks, induction, training and supervision were in place.
“There were enough staff with the appropriate skills and training to meet people's needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people’s routines, preferences, communication needs and life histories. Care records were individualised.
“Staff maintained individualised and person-centred care records which reflected people's needs.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported with activities, contact with relatives and different ways to spend their time according to their preferences.
“People were encouraged and supported to maintain contact with their friends and relatives.” from the report
Privacy and dignity
seriousTwo people sharing a bedroom said it was not their choice and that they lacked privacy. Staff also discussed continence needs loudly, which people found undignified.
“People's privacy and dignity was not always maintained or seen as a priority.” from the report
Personal hygiene and appearance
needs fixingInspectors saw dirt on people’s hands and under fingernails. Some people were unshaven or had untidy hair and had not been offered support with their appearance.
“People were not always supported to maintain good personal hygiene and cleanliness.” from the report
Comfort and choice
needs fixingFour people were positioned uncomfortably. One person was given food after showing they did not like it, and some people said staff could be more responsive and respectful.
“We observed four people positioned in a way that did not aid comfort due to the type of pillows being used.” from the report
Management oversight
needs fixingChecks did not reliably show whether personal care tasks had been completed or what happened when they had not. The provider introduced new checks and training during and after the inspection.
“There was not an effective system in place to check these tasks had been completed as indicated and if not, what was the impact on the person.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that people receive support with washing, nails, shaving and hair care?
- 02How do you make sure people’s privacy is protected when discussing personal or continence needs?
- 03What has changed since the two people sharing a bedroom were moved to separate rooms?
- 04How are the weekly dignity audits reviewed, and what happens when they identify a problem?
- 05How do you check that people are positioned comfortably and that their food choices are respected?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, the care and premises, medicines, staffing, records and infection prevention measures; the home was experiencing a COVID-19 outbreak at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 July 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.
Every inspection of Hurst Nursing Home
6 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2022Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodCaring: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2021Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 January 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
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.