CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Prospect 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 infection risks. This included visitors, admissions, testing, protective equipment, hygiene, social distancing and outbreak planning.
- 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 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 22 March 2021. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control measures during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The home supported people to understand safety measures. Visits were adapted to follow guidance, and people could keep in touch with relatives by telephone and video calls. People also continued some activities and went out when lockdown rules allowed.
Inspectors were assured that the home used personal protective equipment safely, arranged testing, followed social distancing and shielding rules, and had suitable arrangements for admissions, hygiene and managing outbreaks.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall rating or a full rating for the five questions about the service.
Infection prevention
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements to prevent and control infections, including safe use of protective equipment and testing.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Contact with relatives
The home adapted visits to follow restrictions and helped people keep in regular contact with friends and relatives using telephone and video calls.
“People could speak with their friends and relatives regularly, by telephone and via video calls.” from the report
Health care support
People and staff were supported with vaccinations and testing. Staff also worked with health care professionals to review people's health needs.
“Staff worked remotely with health care professionals to ensure people's health care needs were reviewed.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The home had an outbreak plan and action cards for staff, and managers kept up to date with changing national guidance.
“Action cards and an outbreak plan were in place for staff to refer to in the event of an outbreak.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visits currently arranged, and how would you help my relative keep in touch with family if visiting restrictions return?
- 02What checks and isolation arrangements would apply if my relative joined the home or returned from hospital?
- 03How often are people and staff tested, and how are vaccination and health care needs supported?
- 04What would happen if there were an infection outbreak, and how would relatives be told?
- 05How do you keep the infection prevention and control policy and staff guidance up to date?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 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.
What inspectors found, January 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some minor improvements still planned.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 19 and 20 December 2017. One inspector reviewed records, medicines, staffing, complaints, accidents, the building and quality checks. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health and social care professionals, and observed care.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training, personalised support and respectful care. People were supported with their health, food, communication, activities and relationships.
The report says that an earlier comprehensive inspection found three breaches and rated the service Requires Improvement. The required improvements were later made, and inspectors found that these improvements had been sustained at this inspection.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff understood safeguarding procedures and how to respond to concerns.
“People were relaxed and comfortable with staff and looked to them for reassurance and support if they were unsure.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were ordered, stored and disposed of safely. Records and audits were used to identify and correct problems.
“The systems in place reduced potential risks to people and medicines were ordered, stored and disposed of in line with current guidance and legislation.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff listened to people, respected their privacy and adapted communication to their needs.
“People were treated with kindness, dignity, respect and compassion.” from the report
Personalised lives
Support plans focused on people's abilities, interests and choices. People were supported to take part in activities, work and community life.
“Records and our observations demonstrated people had regular opportunities to access their local community, to socialise and follow their interests.” from the report
Positive leadership
Managers were described as accessible and supportive. Inspectors saw a relaxed, inclusive atmosphere and systems to gather feedback.
“We observed the atmosphere to be relaxed and inclusive, with chatter and laughter heard while everyone sat to eat together, including the registered manager and their deputy.” from the report
Bathroom refurbishment
minorThe upstairs bathroom was due to be refurbished, and managers were still considering the best options for people.
“The upstairs bathroom was due to be refurbished and managers were considering the best options for people.” from the report
End of life records
minorEnd of life wishes had been recorded, but managers said they planned to improve the quality of this information for other people living in the home.
“Getting it right meant a lot to the managers and they planned to improve the quality of information in end of life plans for others living at the home.” from the report
- 01Has the upstairs bathroom now been refurbished, and what changes were made for the people living in the home?
- 02How have end of life plans been improved since this inspection?
- 03What specific changes were made after the three breaches found at the earlier inspection?
- 04How do you check that staffing levels and staff skills continue to meet each person's needs?
- 05How are people and their relatives involved in reviewing care plans and giving feedback?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the building, care and all five key questions, including records, medicines, staffing and quality systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 January 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 Prospect House
3 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Gloucestershire
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 £1,360 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.