CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Summerwood
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected by safeguarding systems, risk assessments, suitable staffing and safe recruitment. However, information for some PRN medicines was incomplete, medicine refresher training was overdue, and inspectors found issues with bathrooms, masks and legionella checks.
- Effective?
- Good
- The home assessed people's needs carefully and supported their health, diet, communication and access to healthcare. Staff received training, induction and supervision, although some infection control training was overdue.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were generally kind, respectful and supportive of people's independence and relationships. Inspectors said some staff did not always show dignity and caring because of the bathroom and mask-wearing issues.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Support was highly personalised and people were helped to make choices, understand information and take part in education, work, activities and community life. Staff used creative communication methods and adapted support during the pandemic.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a positive, person-centred culture and staff felt supported. Most quality checks worked well, but some had failed to identify the environmental and PPE problems found by inspectors.
What inspectors found, December 2021
Rated Good, with Outstanding responsive care, but inspectors found some medicines, cleanliness and safety checks needed improvement.
Inspectors visited on 6 and 8 October 2021. They spoke with people using communication tools, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines, staff records and management records.
People were supported to make choices, build independence and take part in community life. Staff understood people's communication needs and personal routines. Relatives and professionals gave very positive feedback, especially about personalised support and activities.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led were rated Good. Responsive was rated Outstanding. The Safe, Caring and Well-led ratings had fallen from Outstanding at the previous inspection in June 2020, while Effective stayed Good and Responsive stayed Outstanding.
Inspectors found some weaknesses in medicines information, staff refresher training, bathroom cleanliness, mask wearing and quality checks. The manager acted promptly on the issues identified during and after the inspection.
Personalised choices
Staff helped people make everyday decisions and understand options in ways that suited them. They used visual tools, objects and step-by-step support to reduce anxiety and increase control.
“People continued to be supported in highly creative ways to understand and make decisions for themselves as much as possible” from the report
Community involvement
People were supported to continue education, maintain relationships, visit familiar places and take part in local activities. Staff worked creatively to keep people connected during the pandemic.
“This helped them maintain their friendships, mental health and wellbeing as well as their continuity of learning.” from the report
Communication support
The home used social stories, pictures, tablets and other communication methods to help people understand changes and express their views.
“Social stories include pictures to help describe situations and these were discussed with people to help them understand and adjust to their new circumstances.” from the report
Good relationships
Relatives and health professionals described staff as committed, approachable and willing to learn. People were supported with kindness and sensitivity, including after family bereavements.
“People and relatives told us they felt safe at Summerwood.” from the report
Medicines information
needs fixingInstructions for some 'when required' medicines were not detailed enough. Inspectors also found that staff refresher training was overdue and that people had not been assessed for safe self-administration.
“Information to support the administration of 'when required' (PRN) medicines was not always present in peoples' care plans or medicines administration records (MARs).” from the report
Environmental and infection control issues
needs fixingTwo bathrooms needed a deep clean and all needed maintenance to reduce cross-contamination risks. Two staff were not wearing masks correctly, and legionella management needed attention. The manager said these issues were addressed after the inspection.
“Two bathrooms required a deep clean and all required some maintenance to reduce the risks of cross contamination.” from the report
Quality checks
needs fixingSome audits and checks had not identified the PPE and environmental problems. The provider had also not always followed its own policies.
“We found most of these to be effective, however, this was not always the case.” from the report
Training records
minorMost staff training was up to date, but some infection prevention and control training was overdue. The provider supplied evidence of workbooks and competency checks after the inspection.
“We noted training was overdue for some staff in areas such as infection prevention and control (IPC).” from the report
- 01How have you updated the care plans and medicine records for 'when required' medicines?
- 02Have all staff who administer medicines completed the required refresher training?
- 03How do you assess whether someone can safely manage any part of their own medicines?
- 04Have the bathroom cleaning, maintenance and mask-wearing issues identified by inspectors been fully resolved?
- 05How do your current audits make sure environmental and infection control problems are identified promptly?
This was an inspection covering all five CQC questions and infection prevention and control measures, with the previous ratings also reviewed for comparison. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 December 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, June 2020
Summerwood rated Outstanding; inspectors found exceptionally safe, caring and personalised support, with effectiveness rated Good.
This was an unannounced inspection on 26 February and 4 March 2020. One inspector spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and checked care, medicines, staffing, training and management records.
The home supported eight people with learning disabilities and/or autism. Inspectors found strong risk management, kind and skilled staff, good health support, clear communication and very personalised care. People were supported to make choices, build independence and take part in community life.
The overall rating was Outstanding. Safe, caring, responsive and well-led were Outstanding. Effective was Good. The previous overall rating was also Outstanding, published on 3 August 2017. The home was larger than recommended by best practice guidance, but inspectors said its arrangements still produced excellent outcomes.
Positive experiences
People and relatives reported that they were very happy with the care and felt reassured about their loved ones' wellbeing.
“People we spoke with told us they were happy living at Summerwood and relatives consistently told us they were exceptionally happy with the excellent care their loved ones received.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff received regular and individual training. Inspectors found that they understood people's needs and worked closely with families and professionals.
“Staff were exceptionally well trained, skilled and supported. Staff received bespoke training when required, to enable them to better support people's individual needs, challenges and health conditions.” from the report
Personalised support
People and relatives were involved in assessments and reviews. Staff adapted support to individual communication, eating, health and emotional needs.
“People and their relatives were involved in assessments, support planning and regular reviews which ensured people were at the centre of their support.” from the report
Compassionate end of life care
The home supported a person to remain at home at the end of their life, with changes to the environment, extra staffing and support from health professionals.
“The service was exceptionally responsive in meeting people's needs at the end of their life.” from the report
Home size
minorThe home supported eight people and was larger than recommended by best practice guidance. Inspectors still rated it Outstanding because they found the service was arranged around people's needs.
“The service is larger than recommended by best practice guidance.” from the report
Renovation delayed
minorPlanned work to the kitchen and ground floor bathroom had been delayed because of other significant events. The report said this was due in July 2020.
“The home had been planning some renovation to the kitchen and ground floor bathroom which had been put on hold due to other significant events that had taken place.” from the report
- 01How would you support my relative's particular communication needs, and which accessible information would you use?
- 02What training and experience do staff have in managing my relative's health conditions, risks or behaviour?
- 03How would you balance safety with my relative's wish to take risks, go out and become more independent?
- 04How are families involved in care planning, reviews and best-interest decisions?
- 05Has the planned kitchen and ground floor bathroom renovation been completed, and if not, when will it happen?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions; the report says Safe improved from Good to Outstanding, Effective remained Good, and Caring and Responsive remained Outstanding since the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 June 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of Summerwood
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2021Goodcurrent ratingdown from OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- June 2020Outstandingstayed OutstandingSafe: OutstandingEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- August 2017Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 May 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.