CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Pendruccombe House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing and managing infections, using PPE safely, arranging testing and maintaining cleaning practices. They were also told that measures were in place to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, April 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control, visiting arrangements and staffing during a COVID-19 outbreak.
This was a targeted inspection on 4 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care. The inspection was announced.
The inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, arranging testing, cleaning high-contact areas and managing infection outbreaks. They were also assured that people were admitted safely and that the infection control policy was up to date.
The home had no staff shortages at the time. The manager helped cover shifts, supported by agency staff and existing staff working extra hours. Visits were restricted during the outbreak, but essential care givers and visits for people receiving end-of-life care were allowed.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating for overall quality.
Staffing cover
The home used its own staff, agency staff and extra hours to maintain staffing during the outbreak. Inspectors were told there had been no staff shortages.
“All staff have been great at covering all the shifts as much as possible.” from the report
Infection control
The home increased cleaning of high-contact areas and the visiting pod. PPE was available, and people and staff were regularly tested.
“Housekeeping staff had additional cleaning regimes as a result of COVID, such as regular cleaning of high contact touch points” from the report
Visiting arrangements
The home followed the visiting guidance in place during the outbreak. Essential care givers and visits for people receiving end-of-life care could continue.
“Essential care givers and visits to people in receipt of end of life care were possible.” from the report
Communication with people
People told inspectors that staff had explained the visiting restrictions and that visits had taken place whenever possible.
“Staff have explained everything to us” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What visiting arrangements are currently in place, including for essential care givers and people receiving end-of-life care?
- 02How does the home maintain safe staffing levels when staff are absent or there is an infection outbreak?
- 03How are staff and visitors tested for infections, and when is PPE required?
- 04How often are high-contact areas and the visiting pod cleaned?
- 05How does the home check that visiting professionals meet its vaccination or exemption requirements?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures, and it did not provide a full rated assessment of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 April 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, December 2018
Pendruccombe House is rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with some risk information not recorded in care plans.
Inspectors made an unannounced comprehensive inspection visit on 6 November 2018. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and a visiting professional. They observed care, checked the building and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staffing, training and other records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives said they felt safe and well cared for. Inspectors found staff were trained, medicines were managed safely, care plans were up to date and people's health needs were monitored.
There were some areas to improve. Staff knew how to support two people who could become distressed or aggressive, but this guidance was not written in their care plans or risk assessments. Some cleaning rooms had been left unlocked, although staff secured them straight away. The overall Good rating remained unchanged from the previous inspection.
Kind and respectful care
People spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff protecting privacy, listening to people and offering reassurance when someone was unwell.
“It's a lovely caring atmosphere to live in.” from the report
Clear care records
Care plans were organised, informative and regularly reviewed. They included people's routines, backgrounds, preferences and support needs.
“Care plans were well organised, informative and up to date.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines records were complete and medicines were stored and checked safely. Staff explained medicines to people and followed required timings.
“Medicines were managed, stored and disposed of safely.” from the report
Good food and activities
Kitchen staff understood people's dietary needs and preferences. People had regular activities, trips and things to do in the home.
“People told us they had plenty to occupy them.” from the report
Supported staff team
Staff received induction, training, supervision and appraisals. Inspectors found a clear management structure and staff said they felt supported.
“Staff told us they were well supported by the senior management team and other staff and felt valued.” from the report
Risk guidance was not written down
needs fixingTwo people could become physically or verbally aggressive when distressed or anxious. Staff understood how to help, but this information was not in care plans or risk assessments, which could lead to inconsistent support.
“There were no risk assessments in place to guide staff who may have been unfamiliar with people's needs.” from the report
Cleaning rooms left unlocked
minorSome doors marked to be kept locked were open, and cleaning products inside could have posed a risk. Staff locked the doors immediately after inspectors raised this.
“We found some doors, which were clearly marked 'Keep locked', had been left unlocked.” from the report
Limited wayfinding signs
minorSome bathrooms, toilets and bedrooms were not clearly marked. The manager said there was no current person needing these extra supports but would consider improving the signs.
“There was limited signage to support people to move around independently and with confidence.” from the report
- 01Have risk assessments and care plans now been updated for people who may become distressed or aggressive?
- 02How do you make sure new or temporary staff know the right approach for each person in these situations?
- 03Have all cleaning rooms and other areas containing potentially harmful products been kept locked?
- 04What improvements have been made to signs for bathrooms, toilets and bedrooms?
- 05How do your current audits check that care plans, medicines records and staffing arrangements remain accurate?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, the premises and the care provided; all ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 December 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 Pendruccombe House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 May 2013.
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
10 live-in carers within about two hours of Cornwall
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 £980 to £1,200 a week. 8 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“He had been a little anxious before she arrived, but has since stated that he would be very happy for her to care for him again”
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.