CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Tudor House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, medicines were handled safely, staffing levels were suitable and infection control measures were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had detailed assessments and personalised care plans. Staff were trained and people were supported with food, drink, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, compassion and dignity. They adapted communication to people's abilities and knew their histories and preferences.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- The home provided exceptionally personalised activities and meaningful experiences. Staff also supported communication, family contact, cultural needs and end-of-life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an approachable management team, positive links with professionals and systems for gathering feedback and checking quality and safety.
What inspectors found, September 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with Outstanding support for personalised activities and family involvement.
This was a comprehensive inspection on 11 and 19 June 2018. The first visit was unannounced and the second was announced. The inspector spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, observed care, and checked care, medicines, training and other records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. It was rated Outstanding for Responsive. Inspectors saw staff providing personalised care, supporting communication and treating people with kindness and dignity.
The strongest area was the wide range of activities for people living with dementia. These included sensory activities, music, baking, gardening, technology and specially supported family outings. The report found no serious risks or concerns.
Personalised activities
The home offered many activities tailored to people's interests, abilities and life histories. Inspectors saw people engaging positively in them.
“The service was exceptionally responsive to people's individual and personalised needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were given sensitively and records checked by the management team. The records reviewed had no gaps.
“MAR charts reviewed did not contain any gaps and dates of opening medicines had been recorded which ensured their safe and appropriate use.” from the report
Kind and dignified care
Staff knew people well and adapted how they communicated. Privacy and dignity were protected during personal care.
“People were treated with kindness and compassion and dignity was respected.” from the report
Family involvement
Relatives were included in care reviews and supported to share meaningful experiences with their family members.
“The provider actively supported people and their loved ones to take part in meaningful experiences for the whole family.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you match the activities and sensory experiences to my relative's interests, abilities and life history?
- 02How will you communicate with my relative if they cannot speak or have difficulty understanding information?
- 03How will I be involved in monthly care plan reviews and decisions about my relative's care?
- 04How would you support my relative's cultural, religious or personal preferences, including at the end of life?
- 05How do you check medicines records and respond if a dose or record is missed?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions; the overall rating remained Good from the previous inspection, while Responsive improved to Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 September 2018 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 Tudor House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 May 2014.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
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 £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.