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.
What inspectors found, April 2024
Rated Inadequate and in special measures; inspectors found kind staff but serious failings in safety, medicines, staffing and management.
This was an unannounced inspection over three visits in January 2024. One inspector observed care, spoke with family members and staff, and reviewed medicines records, care plans, recruitment files and management information.
Inspectors found serious problems with risk assessments, medicines, staffing, training, consent, the building and management checks. Care plans did not give staff enough information, records were not always accurate, and people were not always involved in decisions about their care.
Staff were often kind and knew people well. However, activities were limited, some people were left sitting for long periods, and people's choices and involvement were not always supported. The overall rating fell from Good at the 2018 inspection to Inadequate.
Kind interactions
Inspectors saw staff speaking and acting kindly towards people. Staff listened and responded to what people said.
“Staff were kind and caring, they listened and acted on what was said to them.” from the report
Staff knew people
Staff showed knowledge of the people they supported and could describe some of their preferences.
“Staff demonstrated they knew the people they supported well.” from the report
Health professional links
The home made referrals when concerns were identified and worked with health and social care professionals.
“The service worked alongside the local GP and referrals to the relevant health professionals were submitted if concerns were identified.” from the report
Risk and safety
seriousRisk information was incomplete, the lift was being used without a valid inspection certificate, and some emergency plans were out of date. Call bells were not always within easy reach.
“The system for assessing risk was not robust.” from the report
Medicines
seriousSome medicines needing refrigeration were left out. Instructions for medicines given when needed were not detailed or personalised enough.
“Medicines were not always managed and stored safely.” from the report
Staffing and training
seriousStaffing levels and deployment did not always provide timely support. Some staff had not completed mandatory training or their induction.
“We found evidence the service did not provide adequate staffing levels to ensure care was carried out in a safe and effective way.” from the report
Consent and choice
seriousThe Mental Capacity Act process was not followed properly. People were not always involved in restrictions, care planning or decisions about their support.
“People's rights had not been protected in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.” from the report
Food and drink
needs fixingFluid records were not always completed accurately, drinks were not always within reach, and there was no alternative meal or dessert for people with diabetes.
“There were no alternative meals or deserts for people with diabetes.” from the report
Activities and engagement
needs fixingActivities were brief and people were not consistently offered choices. Some people, including those in their rooms, were left without meaningful interaction for long periods.
“Some people who did not actively engage were left for long periods of times sitting in the same chair.” from the report
- 01What has been done to make medicines safe, including refrigerated medicines and instructions for medicines given when needed?
- 02What are the current staffing levels on each shift, and how do you make sure people receive help promptly?
- 03Have all care plans, risk assessments, emergency evacuation plans and capacity assessments been reviewed and personalised?
- 04What repairs and safety checks have been completed, including the lift, laundry room, leaks and damp areas?
- 05What changes have been made to activities, food choices and support for people who spend time in their rooms?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including the premises and care, with observations, discussions and reviews of records and management information. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 April 2024 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, April 2021
Prospect House Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 17 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The home had 22 people living there and was registered for 24.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, hygiene and possible outbreaks. Staff were seen wearing suitable protective equipment. The home had an isolation policy and plans for people who found isolation difficult.
Visits were mainly through windows, telephone and video calls, with professionals allowed to visit. A room with full protective equipment had been prepared for visitors, including professionals, to use when entering and leaving. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating.
Protective equipment
Staff were seen wearing appropriate protective equipment throughout the inspection.
“staff were seen to be wearing appropriate PPE throughout” from the report
Testing and vaccination
Staff were tested weekly and residents were tested monthly when they were able and willing. Vaccination arrangements were also in place.
“COVID-19 testing was undertaken weekly for all staff and monthly for residents who were able and willing.” from the report
Infection control planning
The home had an up-to-date infection control policy, an isolation policy and plans for situations where isolation was difficult.
“There was a policy in place should people need to isolate and risk assessments and plans had been implemented where isolation was challenging.” from the report
Managing visits
The home supported contact with loved ones through window visits, telephone and video calls, while preparing a controlled area for nominated visitors.
“Residents were able to see and speak to their loved ones whilst maintaining social distancing.” from the report
Professional visitors' PPE
minorInspectors were told that visiting professionals usually arrived wearing their own protective equipment and did not put it on or remove it inside the home. A dedicated area had been created and the home planned to require all visitors to use it.
“visiting professionals generally arrived wearing their own PPE and did not put it on or remove it inside the home.” from the report
- 01What is the current process for professional visitors to put on and remove protective equipment?
- 02How are visits from family members managed now, and what visiting arrangements are available?
- 03How are new residents assessed and supported if they need to isolate?
- 04How often are staff and residents tested now, and what happens after a positive result?
- 05When was the home's infection prevention and control policy last reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under Safe only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas of care were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 April 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.
Every inspection of Prospect House Care Home
5 rated inspections over 9 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Inadequate.
- April 2024Inadequatecurrent ratingSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
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 14 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of St. Helens
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 £1,260 a week. 92 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
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.