CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Russettings Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was using PPE safely, managing testing, supporting social distancing and keeping its infection control policy up to date.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and COVID-19 safety measures.
This was a targeted, announced inspection on 18 March 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic. The home was caring for 24 people and could support up to 45.
Inspectors found that the home was clean and tidy. Communal areas allowed people to keep apart. Staff used suitable personal protective equipment, and there was plenty available.
Staff had infection control training and regular checks on handwashing and using protective equipment. People and staff took part in regular COVID-19 testing, with results monitored by the registered manager.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for the five areas of care.
Clean environment
The home was clean and tidy, including regular cleaning of frequently touched areas such as handrails.
“The home was clean and tidy. Staff worked through all parts of the home to maintain cleanliness and good infection control.” from the report
PPE and training
Staff used appropriate protective equipment, which was available throughout the home. Staff had extra infection control training and regular competency checks.
“Staff were seen to be wearing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), and there was a plentiful supply evident throughout the home.” from the report
Testing was monitored
People and staff took part in the COVID-19 testing programme. Test results were kept clearly and checked regularly.
“The test results were clearly displayed in a folder which was checked regularly by the registered manager to ensure the frequency of tests and results were monitored and correct.” from the report
Suitable layout
Communal spaces had been arranged to support social distancing.
“Communal areas were arranged to enable appropriate spacing between people.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What are the home's current arrangements for visitors and preventing infections?
- 02How often are staff trained and checked on handwashing and using PPE now?
- 03How are COVID-19 or other infection tests arranged and monitored now?
- 04What full CQC ratings or later inspection reports are available for care, staffing, medicines and management?
- 05How would the home safely admit a new resident during an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not assess the other areas of care or give a full service rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 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, September 2019
Russettings Care Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with some improvements still planned.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 2 September 2019. The inspection team spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They reviewed care and staff records, quality checks, incident records and safety information. They also observed how staff supported people.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely, staffing levels were enough and staff were trained. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect, and received care that reflected their needs and choices.
The home had improved in the Responsive area since the previous inspection. Inspectors had previously found that people were not always engaged in activities, but found enough improvement this time. They also noted that signage could be improved to make the home more suitable for people living with dementia.
Safe care
Risks to people's health and safety were assessed and reviewed. Medicines, safeguarding and infection control were managed safely.
“People were safe and protected from avoidable harm. Legal requirements were met.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff built warm relationships with people and supported their privacy, dignity, choices and independence.
“Staff were kind and compassionate to people. People were involved planning their care needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs, preferences, backgrounds and cultural or religious requirements. Staff supported people in ways that reflected this information.
“People received care and support tailored to their individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could take part in group and individual activities, and visitors were welcomed. This was an improvement on the previous inspection.
“People took part in a range of individual and group activities they enjoyed.” from the report
Good management oversight
Managers used audits, incident reviews, meetings and surveys to monitor care and identify improvements.
“The quality of the home was regularly assessed and monitored.” from the report
Use of agency staff
minorPeople and staff mentioned that the home had used a high number of agency staff. Inspectors still found that there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
“Although, there has been a spell where there were lots of agency staff but I haven't been aware of that so much lately.” from the report
Dementia-friendly signs
minorInspectors said the home would benefit from clearer signage to support people living with dementia. The owners were said to be working on a plan.
“We noted however, that people would benefit if the home improved on signage around to make it a more 'dementia friendly home' to meet the needs of people in the home.” from the report
- 01How much are agency staff currently used, and how do you make sure they know each person's care needs?
- 02What changes have been made to the signs and layout to make the home more dementia friendly?
- 03How do you check that activities are offered to people who prefer to stay in their rooms?
- 04How are families involved in reviewing care plans and making best-interests decisions?
- 05What improvements have been made in response to feedback from people and relatives?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and the care provided; the previous overall rating was Good and the Responsive rating improved from Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 September 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.
Every inspection of Russettings Care Home
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- October 2015Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- April 2015Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 March 2014.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
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 £1,020 to £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.