Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a nursing home, run by Sovereign Care

Ampersand

Parsonage Lane, Rochester, ME2 4HP

Requires improvementpublished 30 April 2024, 2 years ago

Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, August 2023

Requires Improvement overall; inspectors rated safety Inadequate and found medicines, risk management, infection control and recruitment were not reliable.

This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 17 and 18 May 2023. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.

The home was rated Inadequate for Safe and Requires Improvement for Well-led. Inspectors found that medicines were not always given as prescribed, risk assessments lacked important information, some areas were not clean, and recruitment checks and staffing deployment were not robust.

People and relatives said staff were kind, respectful and friendly. Staff understood how to report abuse, and the home worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. However, the home remained in breach of regulations and had been rated Requires Improvement for four consecutive inspections.

What inspectors praised
  • Kind and respectful staff

    People and relatives described staff as kind, friendly and respectful. People said staff helped them and made them feel safe.

    They are all very nice and very respectful. They always call me by my namefrom the report
  • Safeguarding awareness

    Staff understood what abuse could mean and knew how to report concerns. Safeguarding concerns had been reported appropriately.

    Staff had received safeguarding training and knew how to escalate concerns to outside organisationsfrom the report
  • Mental capacity practice

    Inspectors found that people were supported to make choices where possible. Where people lacked capacity, decisions were made in their best interests and in the least restrictive way.

    People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their livesfrom the report
  • Positive atmosphere

    Inspectors saw a calm atmosphere, and people and relatives spoke positively about the management and the home.

    There was a calm, relaxed atmosphere at the service.from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Medicines were not reliably managed

    serious

    Inspectors found that patches were not used according to prescriber's instructions and medicine quantities did not always match the records. Daily medicine balances had not been recorded, so it was not possible to establish when errors happened.

    The provider has failed to manage medicines safely. This placed people at risk.from the report
  • Risks were not fully assessed

    serious

    Some risk assessments were missing or lacked important, person-specific information. This included risks linked to infection, falls, anticoagulant medicines, catheters, evacuation and flammable creams.

    Risk assessments did not always have information staff needed to keep people safe.from the report
  • Cleanliness and infection control

    serious

    Some areas were not clean and inspectors noticed a smell of stale urine. Infection risks relating to one person had not been assessed or managed.

    Some areas of the service were not clean. There was a smell of stale urine in one part of the service.from the report
  • Recruitment checks and records

    serious

    Three staff files had gaps in employment history, and the application forms did not collect all the information required. This meant the home could not demonstrate that recruitment was robust.

    Staff recruitment records showed gaps in three members of staff employment history.from the report
  • Staff availability

    needs fixing

    Although the rota appeared sufficient, inspectors found that staff were not always deployed effectively. People sometimes waited for help, including in areas away from the main floor.

    I can ring my call bell and it could be 10 to 15 minutes before anyone comes.from the report
  • Weak management checks

    serious

    Audits had not identified several of the problems found during the inspection. Care records were difficult to read, and daily records did not always explain what personal care had been offered.

    Systems in place to audit the quality of the service were not robust or sufficient to alert the provider of concerns and issues within the service.from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What has changed to make sure every person receives medicines exactly as prescribed, including skin patches?
  2. 02How are you now checking that each person's risk assessment contains complete and person-specific information?
  3. 03What evidence can you show that all areas are clean and infection risks are being assessed and controlled?
  4. 04How are staff deployment and response times to call bells being monitored?
  5. 05How have recruitment records been corrected, and how do you now check that new staff are suitable to work here?

This was a focused follow-up inspection of Safe and Well-led; the Effective, Caring and Responsive ratings were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 August 2023 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 story over the years

Every inspection of Ampersand

5 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.

  1. August 2023Requires improvementcurrent rating
    Safe: InadequateEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read what inspectors found at Ampersand

  2. December 2020Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. September 2020Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. October 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. August 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. December 2017Requires improvementdown from Good
    Safe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. December 2015Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  8. November 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  9. October 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  10. January 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  11. July 2011

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 July 2011.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.

Another option

Or stay at home with a private carer

Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.

Same provider

Other services run by Sovereign Care Limited

2 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.

Caroline House

Hailsham, BN27
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 20 months agocare home

Filsham Lodge

Hailsham, BN27
Requires improvement
NursingDementia
Rated 11 months agocare home
Nearby

Other care homes near Rochester

Orchard View

Rochester, ME2 · 0.0 km
Good
Residential
Rated 6 years agocare home

Lizbis Care Home

Rochester, ME2 · 0.6 km
Requires improvement
ResidentialDementia
Rated 3 years agocare home

Millstream House

Rochester, ME2 · 0.6 km
Good
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home

Kingsdown House

Kent, ME2 · 0.7 km
Requires improvement
Residential
Rated 4 years agocare home