CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Pines
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, March 2022
The Pines: targeted inspection found reassuring infection control, but the service was not rated.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 17 March 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found arrangements for visitors, social distancing, safe admissions, PPE, testing, cleaning and managing outbreaks were in place. They said they were assured about each of these areas.
The home was providing personal care to eight people and could support up to 10. The overall service and Safe question were marked “Inspected but not rated”, so this report does not give a Good or Outstanding rating.
Infection prevention
The home had stayed free of COVID-19 during the pandemic. Staff supported healthy diets and vitamin supplements.
“The home had remained free of COVID-19 throughout the pandemic.” from the report
Protective equipment
The provider kept a plentiful supply of PPE and checked stock levels regularly.
“The provider had maintained a plentiful supply of personal protective equipment (PPE) throughout the pandemic” from the report
Cleaning
Cleaning schedules covered frequently touched areas, with evidence that these areas were sanitised three times each day.
“Evidence was seen of these high-risk areas being sanitised three times a day.” from the report
Testing and visits
People and staff had access to regular testing. Visitors were given PPE and completed a lateral flow test before visiting.
“Extra safety precautions were taken such as PPE provided to visitors and all visitors completing a lateral flow test at the beginning of the visit.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are the infection prevention and control arrangements described in the report being maintained now?
- 02How do you check that there is always enough PPE in stock?
- 03How are people and staff currently tested for infections?
- 04What are the current arrangements for visits, including testing and PPE for visitors?
- 05How do you safely admit new people to the home?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not rate the other four questions or the overall quality of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 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, March 2020
The Pines rated Requires Improvement; care was safe, kind and responsive, but consent records and management checks were not reliable enough.
This was an unannounced inspection over two days. The inspectors spoke with people, staff and managers, and reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, clean premises, kind care, respect for privacy and activities that reflected people's interests.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Effective and Well-led. Some people, relatives and professionals were not involved in important best-interest decisions, and the decisions were not properly recorded. The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found staffing levels were consistently maintained and staff responded to people's requests in a timely way.
“There were enough staff on duty to support people safely and in a timely manner.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People told inspectors staff treated them well. Observations showed care was personal, unhurried and respectful.
“We observed throughout the inspection, numerous interactions between staff and people. All were unhurried, caring and personalised.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's likes, dislikes, interests and life histories. They were reviewed regularly and reflected current needs.
“Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis and reflective of people's current needs.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked with health and social care professionals, including GPs, dieticians and speech and language therapists.
“The provider had worked effectively in partnership with a range of professionals.” from the report
Best-interest decisions were not properly recorded
seriousFor some people who could not make important decisions themselves, the home had not involved the right people or kept records of best-interest decisions. This was a breach and placed people at risk of harm.
“The provider failed to maintain a record of decisions made in people's best interests, in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.” from the report
Management checks missed an issue
needs fixingThe provider's systems had not identified the problem with best-interest decision-making in good time. The manager acted promptly after inspectors raised it.
“The provider had not identified an issue that we found at this inspection and taken action to improve in a timely manner.” from the report
- 01How do you now involve relatives and relevant professionals in best-interest decisions?
- 02How are decisions about matters such as wheelchair seat belts, vaccinations and daily activities recorded?
- 03What checks are now in place to make sure Mental Capacity Act records are complete and up to date?
- 04How will you involve my relative in their care assessment, reviews and daily choices?
- 05What action plan did you send to the CQC, and what progress has been made since this inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, with the CQC reviewing care, premises, records, staffing and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 March 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 The Pines
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2020Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £980 to £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.