- Care home
Palmerston House Care Home
Assessment report published 10 February 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
We carried out a responsive assessment of Palmerston House Care Home between 27 November 2025 and 18 December 2025. This assessment was prompted by the length of time since the last inspection.
Palmerston Care Home is a residential care home providing accommodation with personal care for up to 24 people. The service provides care to older people, those with dementia and physical disabilities. There were 23 people living at the service at the time of our assessment.
During our assessment we observed care and reviewed people’s risk assessments, care plans and medicine administration records. We also looked at policies, procedures, training records, incident records and other documentation relevant to the assessment.
The provider was in breach of 3 legal regulations related to person-centred care, safe care and treatment, and good governance of the service.
The provider did not always support people in a person-centred way and ensure care delivered was dignified or met people’s multiple needs or preferences.
The provider did not always ensure all potential risks to people were understood and managed. People’s health was not always monitored effectively and care plans lacked guidance in relation to risks such as pressure injuries and falls. The provider did not have robust processes to identify environmental risks. There were trip hazards, an unlocked sluice room and incomplete personal emergency evacuation plans. These issues placed people at risk of harm.
Medicines were not always managed safely. Protocols for ’as required’ medicines lacked detail audits were not effective, records were not always accurate and did not provide enough information for clinical review.
Infection prevention and control measures were poor. We observed dirty sinks, stained walls and inadequate cleaning. On one day of our visit, a senior member of staff remained on site while unwell, which increased the risk of infection.
The provider’s governance processes were not robust. Audits did not identify the issues we found during the assessment, because there was a lack of effective oversight and monitoring of the service. Quality assurance systems and processes were not effectively implemented to ensure safety and drive improvement.
Staff were not always recruited safely because governance systems did not ensure effective recruitment practices. Recruitment records were often inaccurate, missing key information, or incomplete, demonstrating poor oversight. However, we found staffing levels were generally adequate, but some mandatory training had expired.
People and relatives told us staff were kind and caring. We observed respectful interactions and people said they felt safe. However, opportunities for meaningful activities were limited, especially for people mainly nursed in bed. There were no dementia-friendly resources and no communal dining area to support social interaction among people.
The management team were open to feedback and showed a willingness to improve. Staff said they felt supported and able to raise concerns and demonstrated good knowledge of safeguarding procedures and responsibilities.
We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
In instances where CQC has begun a process of regulatory action, we may publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded, if the action has been taken forward.
People's experience of this service
During the assessment, we received feedback from people who used the service and relatives. Some people could not directly tell us about their experience. For these individuals we used observations including the short observational framework for inspection (SOFI) to help us assess the quality of care they received.
We received generally positive feedback from people and their relatives about their experiences of the service and the care provided. People and relatives spoke warmly about the staff delivering care. Feedback we received from service users included “Staff are very good, I just ask them, they are always around”, “I need the hoist, always 2 staff, I feel safe, I am quite confident in all the staff that do that”, and “Lovely staff, highly trained.” Feedback we received from family members included “Here over a year, got no issues with the home, the manager is generally available,” they then added “We ask questions, we are proactive, I trust the answers we are getting.” Another relative said,” [Service user] is comfortable and peaceful here, family are happy with her care, staff are generally good with her, we have no concerns.”
People were supported to maintain their relationships with friends and family. We made observations of people receiving visitors. People, relatives, and visitors were given opportunities to share their experiences of the service. People were treated with kindness and respect.