CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Segensworth Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, enough staff, appropriate recruitment checks and safe medicines procedures. Incidents and accidents were investigated and lessons were shared.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supervised, and people's health, food and drink needs were supported. Mental capacity and best-interest processes were in place, with least restrictive support.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed providing kind and compassionate support. People were treated with dignity and involved in decisions, while staff encouraged independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported to communicate, maintain relationships, follow their interests and take part in activities in the community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive and inclusive culture, effective teamwork and regular audits. Relatives said communication had improved since the new manager started.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Segensworth Road is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with further planning needed for future end-of-life support.
This was a planned inspection of the home. One inspector spoke with a person, observed another person with staff, spoke with staff, relatives and healthcare professionals, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines practice, good training, kind support and care plans that reflected people's needs, preferences and communication styles.
People were supported to make choices, build independence and take part in meaningful activities. The home had not supported anyone at the end of their life, but had started discussions with families and planned to explore people's future preferences further.
Meaningful activities
People were supported to take part in a wide range of activities, including community activities and events linked to their interests.
“The provision of meaningful activities for people in the service was very good.” from the report
Building independence
Staff helped people develop skills and take more control in daily life, while balancing support with safety.
“People were supported to be as independent as possible and relatives told us their family members had gained levels of independence they did not think they would be able to.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were ordered, stored, given and disposed of safely, and records were completed properly.
“Medicines were ordered, stored, administered and disposed of safely.” from the report
Positive leadership
The manager had created a more positive culture, with staff working together and relatives reporting better communication.
“The registered manager promoted a positive, inclusive culture where people and staff were valued.” from the report
Future end-of-life planning
minorNobody was receiving end-of-life care during the inspection. The home had started conversations with families but still planned to explore people's preferences and choices further.
“The registered manager told us they were planning to further explore people's preferences and choices in relation to end of life care in line with people's changing needs.” from the report
- 01How are people's end-of-life preferences recorded and reviewed now?
- 02How do you make sure activities continue to match each person's interests, communication needs and comfort?
- 03How do you support each person to build independence while managing their individual risks?
- 04How will families be kept informed if there is a change in a person's health, care plan or wellbeing?
- 05How have the positive changes introduced by the manager since April 2019 been maintained?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, and all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 November 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, January 2017
Segensworth Road was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a new manager still applying for registration.
This was an announced inspection on 15 November 2016. One inspector reviewed care plans, medicine records, staff recruitment and training records, audits and surveys. The inspector spoke with managers and staff, one resident, a relative and an advocacy service.
The home supported two people with learning disabilities, although it could support up to three. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine arrangements, clean and well-maintained premises, suitable staff checks and support plans based on people's needs and preferences.
Staff were described as caring and committed. People were supported to make choices, stay involved in their care, use local services and take part in activities. The home was also carrying out checks and action plans to monitor its work.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. The previous inspection on 3 July 2013 found that the service was meeting all the regulations inspected.
Enough staff
There were two staff on duty during the day for two residents, allowing one-to-one support and access to the local community. Staff were observed working calmly and without rushing.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and dignified care
Staff showed warmth, patience and commitment. Inspectors saw staff supporting people's emotions, independence, privacy and dignity.
“Staff were motivated and demonstrated a clear commitment to providing dignified and compassionate care and support.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's interests, likes, dislikes, goals and ways of communicating. Reviews recorded what had gone well and what could be improved.
“We read both people's care plans and noted that these were detailed and person-centred.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People were supported to choose activities and outings that suited their interests. The home had a car available for use at any time.
“The arrangements for social activities were inclusive and met people's individual needs.” from the report
Checks and oversight
The home used audits, management visits, incident reviews and action plans to monitor the service and identify improvements.
“Audits and checks were carried out to monitor all aspects of the service.” from the report
Managerial change
minorThe registered manager no longer worked at the home and was deregistering. A new manager was in post but had not yet completed the application to become registered.
“The registered manager no longer worked at the service and was in the process of deregistering.” from the report
Recent management changes
minorStaff said the home had experienced several managers and that most staff had worked there for less than a year. They also said the service was now settled.
“There had also been several managers at the service within the past 12 months.” from the report
Electrical work
minorFurther work on the electrical installations had been booked but was due to happen after the inspection. Ask whether this work was completed.
“The regional manager told us that further work on the electrical installations had been booked and was due to be carried out soon.” from the report
Missed ear-drop dose
needs fixingOne dose of olive oil ear drops had been missed. An investigation had started to understand what happened and prevent it happening again.
“One person had missed a dose of their olive oil ear drops.” from the report
- 01Has the new manager now completed CQC registration, and who has legal responsibility for the home while this is being processed?
- 02Was the further electrical work completed, and are all current safety checks up to date?
- 03What did the investigation into the missed ear-drop dose find, and what changed afterwards?
- 04Are there still two staff available during the day for one-to-one support and community activities?
- 05How are the new support-planning arrangements being checked to make sure they remain personalised and up to date?
This was an announced comprehensive inspection of the overall service, covering Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led, and all five ratings were given on this visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 January 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 Segensworth Road
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 December 2010.
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.