CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sansa House
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks, including protective equipment, testing, cleaning, visiting and admissions. The provider also said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Outstanding
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- 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, March 2022
Sansa House was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control and support for safe visits and activities.
This was a targeted inspection about infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures linked to COVID-19. It was announced and the report says the service was given 24 hours’ notice.
Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed. This included the use of protective equipment, testing, cleaning, social distancing, visiting arrangements and the home’s infection control policy.
The home supported people to keep in touch with family and friends safely. It also adapted activities and the environment when community activities were restricted.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most of the five areas.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements to prevent and manage infections, including safe use of protective equipment and testing.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Family visits and activities
People were supported to visit loved ones safely. The home also adapted its environment and bought equipment so people could continue activities during restrictions.
“The home was supporting people to have visits from loved ones in the home, and to visit family and friends in a safe way” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently managing staffing pressures and what effect do they have on people living here?
- 02How do you currently support visits from family and friends?
- 03What infection prevention arrangements are now in place, including protective equipment, testing and cleaning?
- 04How do you help people continue their usual activities when they cannot go out into the community?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 March 2022 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, May 2020
Rated Outstanding overall; inspectors found exceptional, personalised support, with a recruitment records shortfall.
This was an unannounced inspection on 16 and 17 January 2020. Inspectors spoke with people, a relative, staff and professionals. They observed care and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home supported five people with learning disabilities, autism and/or mental health needs. Inspectors found outstanding support, effective care and kindness. People were supported to make choices, build independence, maintain relationships and take part in activities.
Safe, responsive and well-led care were rated Good. Inspectors found medicines, risks, infection control and staffing were managed safely. They did identify that recruitment records did not always show full employment histories or references targeted to health and social care.
The overall rating was Outstanding. Effective care improved from Good to Outstanding since the previous inspection. Caring stayed Outstanding, while Safe and Responsive stayed Good. Well-led fell from Outstanding to Good.
Personalised support
Inspectors found that people were placed at the centre of their care. Staff adapted support to people's abilities, communication and personal goals.
“People received outstanding support which put them at the centre of their care.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff were gentle, patient and cheerful. They supported people's dignity, relationships and independence.
“People were treated with exceptional kindness and compassion.” from the report
Better health outcomes
The home worked closely with health professionals and used evidence-based approaches. Inspectors found improvements in communication, wellbeing, skills and distress.
“The service could evidence how the support they provided to people achieved very positive outcomes, improving people's abilities to communicate their needs, reducing incidents involving behaviours which may challenge and building life skills.” from the report
Safe medicines management
Medicine records showed that people received medicines as prescribed. The home also had detailed guidance for medicines taken when needed or during emergencies.
“People's medicines administration records (MARs) showed they received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Strong communication
Staff used easy-read information, pictures, social stories and Makaton to help people understand information and express their wishes.
“Staff were skilled in understanding and supporting people's communication needs to ensure they had access to information in a way they could understand.” from the report
Recruitment records
needs fixingRecruitment files did not always show a full employment history or reasons for gaps. References were not always aimed at previous health or social care employment. This was raised with management, who said the policy would be amended.
“References were not always targeted to previous employment in health and social care, in line with regulations, but were sought from the most recent employment.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to recruitment checks after inspectors found that employment histories and references were not always complete or appropriately targeted?
- 02How are people's medicine records, including guidance for medicines taken when needed or for epilepsy, checked now?
- 03How will you support my relative's particular communication needs, including the use of easy-read information, pictures, social stories or Makaton?
- 04How did the recent management change affect the home, and who would be responsible for my relative's care if managers changed again?
- 05How are people and families involved in care reviews, activities and decisions about goals and independence?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at the care home, its premises and care, and all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 May 2020 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 Sansa House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2020Outstandingstayed OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 March 2013.
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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.