CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Solent Cliffs Nursing Home Limited
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors found medicines were not always measured or stored safely. They also found gaps in some risk and care records, although staffing, recruitment, safeguarding, infection control and equipment checks were satisfactory.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors found the culture was not always inclusive or dignified. They also found that management systems needed improvement, although the provider had an improvement plan and had started addressing some issues.
What inspectors found, June 2022
Solent Cliffs Nursing Home Limited is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found unsafe medicines management and weaknesses in risk records and dignity.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 9 May 2022. Inspectors looked only at Safe and Well-led because of concerns about medicines, leadership, culture and safety. They spoke with people, staff, managers and relatives, and reviewed care, medicines, staff, infection control and management records.
The home was not always safe. Inspectors could not be sure people received the correct medicine doses or that medicines were stored safely. Some care and risk records did not fully describe skin care, mouth care or treatment needs. Staffing, recruitment, safeguarding, infection control and equipment checks were found to be satisfactory.
The home was not always well-led. Inspectors saw an incident where a person continued eating next to someone who was being sick and was not offered another place to eat. Relatives and staff were mostly positive about the manager and staff, and the provider had begun work on some of the issues.
The overall rating changed from Good to Requires Improvement. The Safe and Well-led ratings also changed from Good to Requires Improvement. The other three key question ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection because they were not inspected this time.
Staffing
Inspectors found enough skilled staff were available and that people were supported without staff appearing rushed. Staffing was adjusted according to people's needs.
“There were enough skilled staff deployed to support people and meet their needs.” from the report
Safeguarding
Staff understood different types of abuse and knew how to report concerns and involve outside agencies.
“Staff were aware of their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that infection prevention measures, including protective equipment and arrangements for visitors, were being used effectively.
“We were assured that the provider was using personal protective equipment( PPE) effectively and safely.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The manager reviewed accidents and incidents for patterns and showed that actions taken had reduced skin damage.
“All incidents and accidents were monitored and reviewed regularly by the registered manager to identify any patterns or trends.” from the report
Kind interactions
During some observations, staff were attentive and compassionate. They used conversation, reassurance and touch to help people feel calmer.
“The person was engaged and relaxed during the conversation.” from the report
Medicine doses
seriousLiquid medicines were poured onto teaspoons without a measuring device. This meant inspectors could not be sure people consistently received the correct dose.
“We observed liquid medicines being poured directly onto teaspoons without using a measuring device.” from the report
Incomplete risk records
needs fixingA skin care plan did not mention a sore or its treatment. Inspectors also found that an effective mouth care plan was not in place for a person who appeared to need a drink.
“the skin integrity care plan did not reference a sore on the person's elbow or the treatment it required.” from the report
Dignity at mealtime
needs fixingOne person remained eating beside someone who was being sick and was not offered another place to eat. Inspectors said this did not show good dignity, inclusion or hygiene practice.
“The person was not offered something else to eat and was not asked if they wanted to move to a different area of the dining room.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to measure liquid medicines accurately, and how are these changes checked?
- 02How are medicines kept secure now, including halved tablets and medicine trolley contents?
- 03How do you make sure care plans include current skin damage, mouth care and treatment instructions?
- 04What has changed since the inspection to protect people's dignity and hygiene during mealtimes?
- 05What progress has been made on the action plan requested by the CQC?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other three key question ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 June 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, January 2019
Solent Cliffs Nursing Home Limited was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some improvement still needed in emergency access and staff supervision.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 26 and 29 November 2018. Two inspectors and an expert by experience reviewed records, observed care, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and sought feedback from professionals.
The home was providing nursing or personal care to 31 people. Inspectors found good arrangements for safety, medicines, staffing, care planning, food and drink, healthcare, dignity, activities and complaints.
The inspection also looked at concerns about moving and handling, end of life care and person-centred care after information had been shared with CQC. Inspectors found these areas were being managed well overall.
All five areas were rated Good. The previous failure to notify CQC about a notifiable event had been corrected, and the home was no longer in breach of that regulation.
Safe medicines
Inspectors checked 20 people's medicine records and found no gaps. Instructions for medicines taken when needed were also in place.
“Medicines were stored, administered and disposed of safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people well, respected their choices and supported them without rushing. Inspectors saw positive interactions during both days of the visit.
“We observed good interaction between people and staff who consistently took care to ask permission before intervening or assisting.” from the report
Personalised activities
People could choose from a range of activities, with one-to-one support for those who did not want or could not join group activities.
“Those preferring not to, or unable to engage in communal activities, were offered one to one sessions with activity staff.” from the report
Good end of life planning
For people on the end of life pathway, care plans recorded current wishes, including religious rituals. Staff were trained and there were end of life champions.
“People's choices and preferences were documented.” from the report
Open management
The manager used audits, feedback, complaints and incidents to identify improvements. Staff and relatives said they felt listened to and supported.
“An effective quality assurance process was in place to enable the registered manager to monitor and identify any shortfalls in the quality of the service people received.” from the report
Emergency evacuation
needs fixingThe home was not purpose built and had narrow corridors. This could make it harder to evacuate people during an emergency, although personal emergency evacuation plans were recorded.
“The premises were not purpose built and had narrow corridors which could present difficulties when evacuating people in the event of an emergency” from the report
Staff supervision
minorThe manager knew that some staff had received less formal supervision than others. A plan was in place to address this.
“The registered manager knew some staff had not received as much formal supervision as others and a plan was in place to address this.” from the report
- 01How would you evacuate my relative if there were a fire or another emergency, given the narrow corridors?
- 02How often will my relative's personal emergency evacuation plan be reviewed?
- 03How do you make sure every member of staff receives regular formal supervision?
- 04How will my relative and our family be involved in reviewing and updating the electronic care plan?
- 05What activities and one-to-one support would be available if my relative did not want to join group activities?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that considered all five quality areas and also followed up concerns about moving and handling, end of life care and person-centred care; the previous inspection was in August 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 January 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 Solent Cliffs Nursing Home Limited
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- June 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Solent Cliffs Nursing Home Limited →
- January 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Solent Cliffs Nursing Home Limited →
- October 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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
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.