CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Purley View Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found systems for safeguarding, risk assessment, recruitment and medicines. They noted stained bed bumpers, worn equipment and a dirty medicine-room fridge, but the provider showed that cleaning and replacement actions had started.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's health, food and consent needs were supported, and the home worked with other professionals. Inspectors found hot rooms and windows needing repair, and some training records were incomplete or inaccurate because of a technical problem.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives said staff treated them well. Inspectors observed kind, unhurried care that respected privacy, dignity, independence, faith and personal choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's needs, preferences and risks, and complaints were handled appropriately. Views about activities were mixed, and some care plans had not been updated regularly, although the provider later supplied evidence that they had been updated.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the management. The home used audits, meetings and surveys to monitor quality and involve people in decisions.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Purley View Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with some equipment, window and record-keeping issues.
The CQC carried out an unannounced inspection on 29 August 2019. One inspector and one Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives, visitors and staff. They observed care and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff during the visit, safe medicine management, suitable care planning and good links with health professionals.
There were some problems. Some bed bumpers and other equipment were stained, torn or worn. Some windows needed repair or replacement. Training records were not always accurate because of a technical problem, and some care plans had not been updated as regularly as others. The provider showed evidence of action after the inspection.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives said staff treated them well. Inspectors saw staff providing thoughtful, unhurried support and promoting privacy and independence.
“We observed staff working with people and saw that they were caring and thoughtful.” from the report
Safe medicines
Nurses' medicine skills were checked. Inspectors found the medicines and records they checked to be in order, with regular audits.
“We counted people's medicines and checked how they was recorded and found everything in order.” from the report
Good health support
The home supported people's healthcare needs and worked with doctors, dentists, dieticians, speech and language therapists and other professionals.
“People were supported with their health care needs and the service worked well with other professionals.” from the report
People involved in decisions
People and relatives could share their views through care reviews, meetings and surveys. Inspectors saw evidence that feedback was used to make improvements.
“People were kept informed about the changes at the service and had the opportunity to provide input in to what was happening.” from the report
Active quality monitoring
The management completed regular audits covering areas such as safety, accidents, incidents and medicines.
“We saw that audits were completed on a regular basis.” from the report
Worn or dirty equipment
needs fixingSome bed bumper rails were stained and some equipment was torn or worn. A medicine-room fridge was dirty, although the provider introduced a new cleaning schedule and ordered replacement equipment.
“However, we noted that some bed bumper rails were stained and that some equipment in the home was torn and worn.” from the report
Windows needed repair
needs fixingSome top-floor rooms were hot because windows could not be opened. Other windows needed restrictors, replacement or repair. The provider said replacement work was being followed up.
“Most of the windows on the top floor of the building had signs on the window stating do not open.” from the report
Training records
needs fixingSome records showed mandatory training as incomplete, although the provider said a technical problem had prevented some data being added and supplied further evidence after the inspection.
“However, records showed that some staff had not completed training that the provider considered mandatory.” from the report
Activities were mixed
minorSome people felt there was not enough to do, particularly if the activities coordinator was away. The manager said one-to-one activities would be targeted and that there was a contingency plan.
“One person said, "There's not much to do for anyone with any bit of their brain left – I get so bored.” from the report
Care plan updates
needs fixingSome care plans had not been updated as regularly as others while the home moved to a new format. The provider later showed evidence that they had been updated.
“However, we found that some care plans had not been updated as regularly as others.” from the report
- 01Which bed bumpers and other equipment have been replaced since the inspection, and how often are they now checked and cleaned?
- 02Have all the windows been repaired or replaced, including the cracked window and the window without a restrictor?
- 03How do you now make sure mandatory training records are complete and accurate?
- 04How are activities planned for people who do not enjoy group activities or when the activities coordinator is away?
- 05How often will my relative's care plan be reviewed and updated?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including both the care provided and the care home premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 October 2019 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 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with some minor building and record-keeping issues to keep under review.
This was an unannounced inspection on 20 December 2016. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They observed care and reviewed care records, staff files, medicines records, training information and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe, staff were kind and there was enough support. Inspectors found safe medicines management, suitable staffing, personalised care plans, activities and systems for handling complaints.
The previous inspection had recommended following national guidance on medicines given covertly. Inspectors found this had improved. They noted some flooring and lighting needed attention, and some people's personal history information was limited.
Safe medicines practice
Inspectors found medicines were given at the right times and records were complete. The earlier concern about covert medicines had been improved.
“The records we reviewed were fully completed.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about the staff. Inspectors saw staff respecting privacy, dignity and personal choices.
“We observed staff were friendly, caring and kind” from the report
Activities and social contact
The home offered activities across the week, including visits to people's rooms, trips and entertainment. Inspectors saw people taking part in activities during the visit.
“There was a variety of activities for people to get involved in if they so wished.” from the report
Strong quality monitoring
The provider used audits, meetings and incident reviews to identify improvements. Inspectors saw an example where falls information led to new procedures.
“Regular audits were completed to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided.” from the report
Wet room repairs
minorSome bathroom and wet room flooring needed renewal, and some ground-floor wet room lights were not working. The manager said these improvements were ongoing.
“We noted that some bathroom/wet room flooring would benefit from being renewed before they became a risk to people” from the report
Limited personal history information
minorSome records did not contain enough information about people's backgrounds and this information was not always easy for staff to find. Managers agreed to look at recording staff knowledge as well.
“Some people had only limited information in their records and this was not readily available for staff to refer to.” from the report
New staff experience
minorOne person said some new staff were learning while working. Inspectors also reported that staff had the required training and support.
“mostly they are well trained, but some new ones are learning on the job” from the report
- 01Have the bathroom and wet room flooring been renewed, and have the faulty ground-floor wet room lights been replaced?
- 02How do you record each person's life history, interests and preferences so all staff can find and use this information?
- 03How are new staff supervised and supported while they are learning on the job?
- 04How do you check that staffing levels remain sufficient when staff are busy or people's needs change?
- 05How do you review medicines given covertly and involve relatives, the GP and pharmacist where appropriate?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and all five CQC areas, with the previous covert medicines recommendation also checked. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 2017 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 Purley View Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 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 Croydon
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 £1,230 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.