Prideaux House

Updated 13 March 2021

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 4 March 2021 and was announced.

Updated 13 March 2021

Prideaux House is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The inspection took place on the 29 October 2018. This visit was unannounced. A second inspection day took place on the 30 October 2018 and was announced.

Prideaux House is situated in Eastbourne and provides accommodation and personal care for up to 20 older people living with Dementia. There were 13 people using the service at the time of inspection. The service also provided short stays for people, otherwise known as respite, however there was no respite care provided at the time of inspection. People’s bedrooms were situated over three floors; some people had ensuites and there were communal facilities on each floor for those that did not.

At our last inspection in August 2017, the service was rated 'Requires Improvement'. During this inspection, we found significant improvements had been made to address areas of concern with some areas that were outstanding.

The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Everyone we spoke to felt it was “The little touches” that made the service special. People, their relative’s and health professionals considered the responsive nature of the service to be outstanding. Staff were extremely responsive to people when their needs changed and took immediate action to improve their wellbeing. People’s wishes were considered of utmost importance and relatives gave the highest praise about the care and supported provided at the end of people’s lives. Staff were extremely knowledgeable of people’s individual communication needs and ensured that these were always met in a person-centred way. There had been significant improvements to the complaints process since the previous inspection. People and relatives were confident any concerns they raised would be listened to and their views valued. They spoke of the registered manager’s passion to strive to improve. People had choice and control over the activities they wanted to participate in each day. There were a varied activities programme tailor-made to people's likes and dislikes. Links to the community were valued and continually promoted to improve people’s health and social wellbeing.

People were kept safe by staff who had a good understanding of safeguarding processes and how to minimise risks. People received their medicines safely from trained and competent staff. There were suitable numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and they were recruited safely. The registered manager and staff team had worked hard to improve areas of risk such as medicines management and falls and this had a positive impact on people. People lived in a safe environment that was clean and well maintained.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practise.

Staff received sufficient training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s individual needs. They told us that their induction was robust and regular supervision gave them opportunities to express concerns and feel motivated in their role. Staff were also encouraged to develop skills by completing additional qualifications in health and social care.

People’s nutritional needs were met and emphasis made not only to the quality of food but to the dining experience. Records showed that the provider sought guidance regularly from health and social care professionals where additional support needs were identified. Professionals we spoke with felt that staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and were responsive to any feedback given.

Everyone we spoke to was unanimous that staff were kind, caring and supportive of people. Staff were proud of people’s achievements and celebrated them. People's dignity, independence and privacy was promoted and encouraged. Staff knew people, their preferences and support needs well.

People, staff, relatives and professionals spoke positively about the management team. They felt that the service was without any doubt well-led and that an open, transparent and supportive culture was promoted. The registered manager was passionate about improving the service and valued manager forums where new ideas could be discussed and developed.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.