You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile


Review carried out on 9 September 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about The Polegate Care Home on 9 September 2021. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about The Polegate Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.

Inspection carried out on 30 March 2021

During an inspection looking at part of the service

The Polegate Care Home is a nursing home providing support and accommodation for up to 44 people. At the time of the inspection, there were 40 people living at the home. 12 of the rooms at the home were booked by local hospitals for people who were 'non-weight bearing'. These were used for short term support for people.

We found the following examples of good practice.

The home was clean and hygienic. There was a designated housekeeping team and cleaning schedules reflected that high touch areas were being cleaned regularly throughout the day. A visitor pod had been created to facilitate safe visiting.

The home was following current government guidance on supporting visits to the home. Visits to the home were booked in advance and staggered throughout the day. Visitors took a lateral flow test before entering the building, signed a COVID-19 declaration form and had their temperatures taken. Visitors had the option to visit people in their bedrooms or in the designated visitor pod. Visitors that chose to see people in their bedrooms were asked to wear full personal protective equipment (PPE) throughout the visit. The visitor pod had an external entrance and a full length screen between the person and their visitor. There was a two-way speaker system in place to support people to be able to clearly hear. The visitor pod was cleaned between each use and the times of the pod visit were different to the in-house visits in order to reduce footfall in the home. People were also supported by staff to use video calling technology to keep in touch with their loved ones.

Visits to people receiving end of life care had been supported throughout the pandemic. There were limited restrictions on end of life visits in that two designated family members could come and go throughout the day following a negative lateral flow test result.

People were supported to socially distance where possible. Staff had tried to balance safety with people’s wellbeing and encouraged people to get involved in in house activities. People who chose to stay in their bedrooms or were being supported with care in bed were supported with one to one activities.

Staff were wearing PPE in line with government guidance. There were PPE stations around the home. For people isolating in their rooms there were PPE stations outside their bedroom doors. Staff had received training in putting on and taking off PPE safely and the infection control lead completed regular competency checks to ensure staff were following correct procedures. Staff had also received infection control training.

There were risk assessments for people and staff to assess for factors that could increase their risk from COVID-19. People had COVID-19 care plans and individual visitor plans in place.

Inspection carried out on 9 December 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service

The Polegate Nursing Home is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care for up to 44 older people. At the time of the inspection 39 people were living at the home. Most people needed support from staff for personal care and moving around the home safely and were living with a range of healthcare needs. This included living with diabetes, physical disability, Parkinson’s Disease and frailty linked to age.

14 of the rooms at the home were booked by local hospitals for people who were ‘Non-weight bearing’. These were used for short term support, usually between two to six weeks, for people following surgery or care in hospital for fractures (broken bones) and injuries due to accidents at home.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were very positive about the care and support they received. They told us they felt safe because the staff looked after them, “Very well” and “Not one member of staff who is not willing to help, the night staff are brilliant too.” Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and people said they were kind and caring.

An effective quality assurance system monitored all aspects of the services provided and action was taken when areas for improvement were identified. People, relatives and staff were empowered to be involved in how the service developed. Regular meetings and satisfaction surveys encouraged feedback, in addition to daily talks and discussions.

There were enough staff working in the home and a robust recruitment procedure meant only suitable staff were employed. Staff attended training and had a good understanding of people’s needs. Regular supervision supported staff to be aware of their roles and responsibilities and enabled them to discuss their professional development; with additional training provided when needed.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the home supported this practice.

People were protected from the risk of abuse, harm or discrimination because staff had completed safeguarding training and knew what action they should take if they had any concerns. Medicines were managed safely, and staff were required to complete appropriate training and competency assessments.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good. (Published 29 April 2017)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection carried out on 13 March 2017

During a routine inspection

The Polegate Care Home is a purpose built location. It is registered to provide accommodation for up to 44 people. Providing care and nursing for people including those who live with a dementia diagnosis. The service also provides support for up to eleven ‘non-weight bearing’ people who require support and accommodation during a period of respite care.

This was an unannounced inspection which took place on 13 March 2016.

The Polegate Care Home was inspected in December 2015. Three breaches of regulation were identified. Regulation 12, Safe care and treatment, Regulation 10, Dignity and Respect and Regulation 18, Staffing of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Since this inspection there has been a change to the provider name, however, The Polegate Care Home is still owned by the Bupa Group and the registered manager remains the same. The provider sent us an action plan stating they would have addressed all of these concerns by February 2016. At this inspection we found the provider was meeting the regulations of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

The Polegate Care Home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

The registered manager was in day to day charge of the home, supported by a clinical lead nurse/ deputy manager. People told us that they felt supported by the management there was always someone available to support them when needed. Staff told us that the registered manager had a good overview of the home and knew everyone well.

People, relatives and staff told us the home was organised and well led. Staff felt supported and encouraged to provide person centred care for people and were motivated to improve people’s day to day lives. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s needs and displayed kindness, patience and compassion when providing care. Care delivery was person centred and people and their next of kin if appropriate were involved in reviews of their care plans and how care was provided. Staff were prepared to give their own time to support people to attend events or do things that were important to them.

Environmental and individual risks to people were assessed and reviewed. Whilst encouraging people to maintain independence when possible people’s choices and wishes were supported. Management and staff had a good understanding of mental capacity assessments (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of how to recognise and report abuse. Staff treated people with respect and dignity and involved people in decisions about how they spent their time. People were asked for their consent before care was provided and had their privacy and dignity respected. Feedback was gained from people this included questionnaires and regular meetings with minutes available for people to access.

A full and varied programme of activity was provided. People told us they enjoyed the activities and were supported to stay active and do the things they enjoyed. Information was provided to inform people what had been planned and people were invited to give feedback.

Medicine policies and procedures were in place to ensure people received their medicines safely and all medicine procedures were checked and audited. People told us they received their medicines when they should and staff supported them to stay healthy.

People gave positive feedback about the meals provided. People had a choice of meals and staff knew people’s likes and dislikes. People’s nutritional needs were monitored and reviewed.

All required maintenance and servicing of equipment had taken pl