Simonsfield Care Home

“We carried out this assessment on 5 and 7 October 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.”

“The registered manager promoted an open and transparent culture where people, staff and others felt confident to raise safety concerns and report incidents. Concerns and incidents were thoroughly investigated, and learning was shared across the staff team to support continuous improvement and help keep people safe.”

“Safeguarding concerns were appropriately referred to the local authority and notified to Care Quality Commission (CQC). Although staff knew how to keep people safe, staff had limited understanding regarding how to identify certain forms of abuse, Further training was needed to improve staff understanding of safeguarding and what it means in the context of their roles and responsibilities.”

“Risk assessments for people were person centred, and staff used people’s histories and preferences to plan activities.”

“A system was in place to manage maintenance tasks, and staff were able to report concerns promptly. Some areas of the service required refurbishment due to the age and to better meet the needs of people living with dementia, including flooring in some people’s bedrooms. The registered manager had raised these issues with the provider, and plans were in place to carry out the necessary improvements.”

“Staffing levels were monitored by the registered manager, who regularly reviewed people's care needs. However, some people told us they felt additional staff were needed, as they sometimes experienced delays in receiving support when required. We raised this with the registered manager and regional manager, who assured us that a new process was being implemented to ensure staffing levels are regularly monitored and reviewed to meet people's needs.”

“People’s medicines were not always managed safely, and some people did not receive their medicines as prescribed. We found time critical medicines were not always administered at the correct times. However, staff followed appropriate procedures for the management of controlled drugs, including secure storage, accurate record-keeping and regular checks. Following the inspection, the provider gave assurances action would be taken to address these concerns and had sought support from relevant healthcare professionals to improve practice.”

“People’s needs were assessed and reviewed effectively using person-centred information and regular updates to ensure care reflected their current health, wellbeing and preferences. Some relatives told us they were involved in decisions about care and support where appropriate. One relative told us, “They [staff] call us and let us know if there are any changes to [Name]. We discuss the best way forward, as we know [Name]'s likes and dislikes.””

“Staff worked well with local healthcare professionals who visited the home on a regular basis and provided staff with support. One visiting professional told us, “Staff will contact us regarding residents if they are concerned. They [Staff] are always prepared for our visits and they know people well.””

“Staff monitored people’s health daily and knew how to escalate concerns if people’s condition changed. Family members agreed the staff and the registered manager were responsive to people’s health and acted quickly if they noticed a decline. One family member said, “[Name] has put on weight since they came to Simonsfield, it shows how much staff have…”