CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Prinsted Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found infection prevention and control arrangements in place.
This was a targeted inspection on 29 January 2021. It looked at how the home was prepared to prevent and control coronavirus infections.
Inspectors were assured that the home managed visitors, distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and possible outbreaks. They also found that the infection control policy was up to date.
The home supported people living with dementia during testing and helped them use lower-risk areas. This inspection did not give an overall quality rating.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infections, including access to testing and effective use of PPE.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Support for people with dementia
Staff adapted support for people who became anxious about coronavirus testing. People could also walk through lower-risk areas with staff support.
“People who showed anxiety with Covid19 testing were supported specifically by staff who they felt closest to in order to reduce anxieties.” from the report
Testing arrangements
The home worked with other local care homes to coordinate the collection of testing kits and reduce courier visits.
“The provider had taken a proactive approach to collection of Covid-19 testing kits.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently prevented from catching or spreading infections?
- 02How do you support people living with dementia who become anxious about testing?
- 03How do you currently arrange testing for people living here and staff?
- 04How do you make sure PPE is used safely and effectively?
- 05What arrangements are in place to prevent or manage an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not assess the other four key questions or give an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 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 2020
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding caring; inspectors found safe, personalised care and strong leadership.
This was an unannounced inspection on 13 and 19 November 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines, staff records and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. Caring improved from Good to Outstanding. Inspectors found that people were treated with exceptional kindness, dignity and respect, and that care was tailored to their wishes.
Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, clean premises and good links with healthcare professionals. They noted that guidance for some medicines given when needed could be more personalised, although some guidance was improved during the inspection. The previous overall rating was also Good, published on 17 February 2017.
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated people with exceptional warmth and respect. Inspectors saw strong relationships and care that protected people's dignity.
“Staff treated people with the utmost dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's needs, likes and dislikes in detail. Staff supported people to make choices, remain independent and continue their usual interests.
“Care plans provided detailed information and guidance for staff on people's care and support needs, likes and dislikes, and exactly how they wished to receive personal care.” from the report
Activities and relationships
The home offered activities and outings based on what people wanted. Staff helped people maintain family, social and personal connections.
“There was a wide array of activity which was fully focused on the people at the service and their wishes.” from the report
Staffing and safety
Inspectors found enough staff to keep people safe, with staffing adjusted to people's needs. Staff understood risks and how to respond to safeguarding concerns.
“There were enough staff on duty to keep people safe.” from the report
Leadership and improvement
Managers were visible and approachable. Audits, clinical reviews and action plans were used to monitor quality and make improvements.
“There was a robust system in place to monitor the service and drive improvement.” from the report
Some medicine guidance needed more detail
minorInspectors said guidance for some medicines given when needed could include more personal information about when to give them and how a person might show they needed them. Some protocols were updated during the inspection.
“We discussed with the registered manager how the written guidance could be further improved by adding personalised information on when to give the medicine” from the report
- 01How do you make sure guidance for medicines given when needed is personalised to each resident?
- 02What are the current staffing levels on each shift, and how are they adjusted when people's needs change?
- 03How will you support my relative to continue their hobbies, relationships and preferred activities?
- 04How will my relative be involved in writing and reviewing their care plan?
- 05What changes have been made since the November 2019 inspection?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at the overall service and all five key questions; Caring improved from Good to Outstanding and the other ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 January 2020 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 Prinsted Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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.