CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Prideaux Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection prevention and support for people during the pandemic.
This was a targeted, announced inspection about infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic. The report says the visit took place on 4 February 2021, although the detailed findings say 5 February 2021.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, hygiene and possible outbreaks safely. They also found that the infection control policy was up to date.
Staff used dolls, teddy bears and easy-read information to help people understand protective equipment, testing and lockdown rules. The home also changed parts of its environment, practised outbreak arrangements and increased activities to support people's wellbeing.
The home was inspected but not rated. This was not a full assessment of the service's overall quality.
Clear explanations
Staff used dolls, teddy bears and easy-read information to help people understand protective equipment, testing and lockdown restrictions.
“Staff had used people's teddy bears and dolls to demonstrate personal protective equipment (PPE) that staff would be wearing” from the report
Infection control changes
The home changed flooring, radiator covers, hand-sanitiser dispensers, lighting and tables to make cleaning and infection control easier.
“The provider had made changes to the environment to support infection control.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The home had plans for an outbreak and practised helping people become familiar with spending time in their bedrooms.
“There were clear plans in place on how to support people in the event of an outbreak.” from the report
Support for wellbeing
Staff continued to provide activities and links with outside projects during the pandemic, including movement and physiotherapy sessions.
“Staff had focused on people's wellbeing throughout the pandemic.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you help my relative understand testing, protective equipment or any changes to their routine?
- 02If there were an outbreak, how would you support my relative if they needed to stay in their bedroom?
- 03How would you maintain activities and emotional support during an outbreak or lockdown?
- 04How do you make sure there are enough trained staff to cover different roles if staff become unwell?
- 05How are visitors, testing and protective equipment managed now?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide a full overall rating of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 February 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 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found significant improvements, safe care and kind staff, with no areas needing improvement.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 8 and 9 December 2016. Inspectors checked whether the home had acted on problems found in October 2015. They reviewed care plans, medicines, staff records, complaints, accidents, audits and the building. They also spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, and observed care.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, detailed care plans and staff who understood people's needs. People appeared happy and relaxed, and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
The home had previously received requirement notices for two breaches. Inspectors found significant improvements and said the legal requirements were now being met. No areas requiring improvement were identified at this inspection.
Improvements since the last inspection
The home had acted on the problems identified in 2015. Inspectors found no areas requiring improvement during this visit.
“At this inspection we found significant improvements had taken place and no areas requiring improvement were identified.” from the report
Sufficient staffing
Inspectors found enough skilled staff to provide care safely and without rushing people.
“There were enough skilled and experienced staff to ensure the safety of people who lived at the home.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff took time to understand people and supported privacy, dignity, independence and personal choices.
“People were treated with kindness and consideration in their day-to-day care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs, preferences and routines. Staff had time to update records and share information between shifts.
“Care plans contained a comprehensive assessment of people's individual needs and clearly identified how these should be met.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could take part in activities at home and in the wider community, based on their interests and choices.
“People had opportunities to take part in various activities and to access the local and wider area.” from the report
Some capacity records still being updated
minorAlthough mental capacity arrangements had improved, the detail in some care plans about best-interest decisions was variable and was still being updated.
“Where people had been deemed to lack capacity for a specific decision of daily living the detail held within peoples care plans was variable” from the report
One infection-control practice
minorInspectors saw one occasion when a staff member did not follow best practice for infection control. A senior staff member addressed this immediately.
“During our inspection we observed a member of staff on one occasion not adhering to best practice with regard to infection control.” from the report
- 01How do you now record mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions for each person?
- 02How do you check that staff continue to follow infection-control procedures?
- 03How will you review staffing levels if my relative's needs or risk of falls change?
- 04How will my relative's personal history, preferences and daily routines be reflected in their care plan?
- 05How are medicines records checked after the audit found minor recording discrepancies in October 2016?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection focused on checking action taken after the October 2015 inspection, and it gave ratings for all five areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 January 2017 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 Prideaux Lodge
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 September 2014.
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
19 live-in carers within about an hour of East 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 £1,000 to £1,400 a week. 13 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“When he point blank refused to go into hospital for a life saving blood transfusion she talked him through the situation and agreed to go in the ambulance with him and stayed until he was settled.”
“Una felt safe, secure and loved in her time with Debbie which is a gift that I am eternally grateful for.”
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.