CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Prospect House - Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks, medicines, recruitment, infection control and the living environment were managed safely, although staffing levels were not always sufficient.
- Effective?
- Good
- The report says people's care plans reflected their needs and staff supported their health, choices and independence. No separate rating was given for this question.
- Caring?
- Good
- People received kind and compassionate care, and staff respected their privacy and dignity. No separate rating was given for this question.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Staff communicated in ways that met people's needs and supported activities, interests and local community involvement. No separate rating was given for this question.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers were visible and approachable. Governance systems, feedback arrangements and learning from incidents supported a positive and improvement-focused culture.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Rated Good; people received kind, safe care, but inspectors found staffing could leave staff rushed and unable to supervise everyone.
Inspectors visited on 16 and 20 November 2023 without giving notice. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were also rated Good. People told inspectors they felt safe and well cared for. Staff understood people's needs, managed medicines safely and supported people's choices, activities and independence.
The main weakness was staffing. People received their planned one-to-one care hours, but there were not always enough staff to meet changing needs. Inspectors saw staff rushing and being unable to supervise everyone at times. They recommended that staffing levels be reviewed.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as kind and said people were well cared for. Inspectors found that privacy and dignity were protected.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Choice and independence
People could personalise their rooms and choose their living environment. Staff supported activities, work and interests in the local area.
“Staff supported people to take part in activities and pursue their interests in the local area.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were managed safely, including as-needed medicines and medicines given covertly. Staff supported people to become as independent as possible with medicines.
“Medicines were managed safely. Staff followed effective processes to assess and provide the support people needed to take their medicines.” from the report
Open management
Managers were visible and approachable. Staff felt respected and able to raise concerns, while the provider used checks and incident learning to improve care.
“Members of the management team were visible in the service. They were approachable and took a genuine interest in what people, staff, family and other professionals had to say.” from the report
Staffing levels
needs fixingThere were not always enough staff on duty to meet people's needs. Inspectors saw staff rushing and unable to supervise everyone at times, so they recommended a review of staffing systems.
“There were not always sufficient staff on duty to meet people's needs.” from the report
Some repairs and decoration needed
minorSome parts of the home needed decoration and some bathroom flooring needed replacing. The provider had an action plan to address this.
“Some areas of the service required decoration, and some flooring in a bathroom required replacing.” from the report
- 01How many staff are normally on duty in each unit, and what happens when people's needs change?
- 02How will you make sure staff can supervise everyone safely when staff are rushed?
- 03What is the timetable for completing the decoration and replacing the bathroom flooring?
- 04How will you support my relative to take part in activities and pursue their interests?
- 05How will my relative be supported to take medicines as independently as possible?
This inspection examined the home and the care provided, but the report gives ratings only for Safe and Well-led; the other key questions were not separately rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 December 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, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found safe infection control arrangements during the coronavirus pandemic.
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control. Inspectors visited on 9 November 2020 and spoke with staff and the manager, observed the home and its infection control practices, and contacted two relatives.
Inspectors did not speak with people living in the home because they wanted to reduce the risk of cross infection. They found that the home was using personal protective equipment, cleaning frequently touched surfaces and managing coronavirus risks.
The home was assured to be following safe infection prevention and control procedures. This inspection did not give an overall quality rating, and the Safe question was recorded as inspected but not rated.
Safe admissions
The home had systems to admit people safely.
“The systems in place allowed people to be admitted to the home safely.” from the report
Staff training
There was clear guidance about protective equipment and handwashing, and staff had received infection control training.
“There was clear signage on the correct use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and handwashing techniques and staff had received appropriate infection control and prevention training.” from the report
Safer visits
The home used a booking system, health screening, visitor agreements, social distancing and protective equipment to manage visits.
“A risk assessment was in place for ensuring safe visits, this included a booking system, to allow for social distancing, visitor agreement form, health screening and use of PPE.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the environment clean, with extra cleaning of frequently touched surfaces.
“The environment was clean. Additional cleaning was taking place including of frequently touched surfaces.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now?
- 02How are visitors currently screened and what protective equipment is required?
- 03How do you test people living here and staff for infections?
- 04What happens if someone living here or a member of staff develops an infection?
- 05How are visits supported when in-person visiting is restricted?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; it did not assess the other four key questions or provide an overall quality rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 December 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 Prospect House - Care Home
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 November 2010.
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
16 live-in carers within about an hour of East Riding of Yorkshire
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 £1,030 to £1,420 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared 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.