CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Prospect House Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable infection prevention and control arrangements, including for visitors, admissions, PPE, testing, hygiene and outbreaks.
- 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
Prospect House Residential Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and safety arrangements.
The inspection took place on 30 March 2021 and was announced. It was a targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic, focused on infection prevention and control in the home.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, social distancing, admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, hygiene and possible outbreaks appropriately. They also found that the infection prevention and control policy was up to date.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a separate rated result for safe care.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infections, including effective use of PPE and access to testing.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Safe environment
The home used its layout and management of the environment to support social distancing while keeping a homely atmosphere.
“Proactive management of the environment enabled staff and people living in the home to maintain social distancing, whilst allowing people to be cared for in a homely atmosphere.” from the report
Communication and visits
The registered manager kept relatives and friends informed, and a heated garden pod supported visits.
“Regular, honest and open communication from the registered manager to relatives and friends and a heated garden 'pod' named the Chatterbox, provided assurance to relatives and allowed supported visits for people living in the home.” from the report
Risk management
Inspectors found that safety and welfare had been prioritised, with risk assessments and ongoing reviews of guidance.
“The team had prioritised the safety and welfare of the people living at the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently protected from catching or spreading infections?
- 02How do you use the home's layout and hygiene practices to reduce infection risks?
- 03What arrangements are in place for testing people living in the home and staff?
- 04How would you manage an infection outbreak, and how would relatives be kept informed?
- 05Are supported visits still available through the heated garden pod, and what rules apply?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 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, February 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and good management, with some records needing improvement.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 5 February 2018. The inspector and an expert-by-experience spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and visiting health professionals. They also observed care, looked around the home and checked care, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable training and kind care. People were supported to make choices, keep their independence and stay in touch with family and friends.
Care plans were personalised and reviewed regularly. Activities were based on people's interests. The home had systems for checking quality and safety. A few issues needed improvement, including daytime records of position changes to prevent pressure sores, some medicines instructions and the condition of the laundry floor.
The previous inspection also rated the home Good. Inspectors found that the evidence continued to support this rating and found no serious risks or concerns.
Staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and evidence that staff were safely recruited before starting work.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff employed to make sure people received the support they needed, and those staff had been safely recruited.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated people politely and understood their needs. They protected privacy and dignity and encouraged people to do things for themselves.
“We observed that staff approached people respectfully and politely and demonstrated a good understanding of their needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's personalities, communication needs, lifestyles, interests and capabilities. They were reviewed monthly and in more detail each year.
“Care plans and risk assessments were reviewed each month, and in more depth each year, to ensure they contained up to date information.” from the report
Working with health professionals
Staff sought advice appropriately and included health professionals' guidance in care plans. Inspectors found that staff managed pressure sores effectively.
“Staff ask for advice appropriately and follow our advice” from the report
Quality checks
The home used surveys, meetings and audits to monitor care, medicines, infection control and the premises. Action plans recorded how improvements would be made.
“Regular audits were carried out on various topics, including care plans, medicines management, the prevention and control of infection and the safety of the environment.” from the report
Daytime pressure-sore records
needs fixingRecords of people's position changes during the day were not as effective as the night-time records. Inspectors said this needed to improve.
“The recording of people's positional changes during the day to reduce the risk of pressure sores needed to improve, although the recording during the night was effective.” from the report
Medicines instructions
needs fixingSome medicines were recorded as being used only when needed, although the prescriptions said they were required four times a day. The manager said they would ask the GP to amend the instructions.
“Some medicines had been recorded as if they were 'as and when required' (PRN) medicines but they had been prescribed by the person's GP as being required four times a day.” from the report
Laundry floor
minorThe laundry floor needed repainting so that it stayed impervious. The manager said this would be done promptly.
“We noted the laundry floor would have benefitted from re-painting so that it remained impervious.” from the report
Waiting for two staff
minorOne person who needed two staff for personal care said they might have to wait until both staff were available. Inspectors otherwise found staff were visible and people received prompt attention.
“One person who required two staff to assist them with personal care told us they might have to wait until two staff were available at the same time.” from the report
- 01How do you now record daytime position changes for people at risk of pressure sores, and how do you check that records are complete?
- 02How are medicines instructions checked against prescriptions, especially medicines recorded as 'as and when required'?
- 03Has the laundry floor been repainted, and how do you monitor the condition of the premises?
- 04How do you make sure people do not have to wait too long when two staff are needed for personal care?
- 05How are activities reviewed to make sure they continue to match each person's interests and abilities?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions and the overall rating; the report says the previous Good ratings continued. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 February 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 Residential Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Prospect House Residential Home →
- February 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Prospect House Residential Home →
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 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
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.