Eastbourne Care Home

Updated 8 January 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 care homes with outbreaks of coronavirus, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control practice was safe and the service was compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 9 December 2020 and was announced with 24 hours notice.

Updated 8 January 2021

This inspection was unannounced and took place on 11, 26 and 30 October 2017. The staff and registered provider did not know that we would be visiting.

This was the first inspection since the new provider registered to operate this service.

Eastbourne Care Home provides care and accommodation for up to 42 people. It provides care to 24 people with nursing needs on the first floor and two people with nursing needs on the ground floor. It has a separate unit on the ground floor with 15 intermediate care places that are funded by the local Clinical Commissioning Group. These places are for people who require a short rehabilitation service to recover following an illness or injury. On the day of our inspection there were 35 people using the service.

The registered manager had been in post since the service was registered in September 2016. 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.

People were happy and told us they felt safe. The staff had a clear understanding of safeguarding and ensured that action was taken if concerns arose about the way people were supported. Staff ensured any risks were closely managed. Following the purchase of the service we found that the registered manager and provider had consistently worked to drive improvements within the service.

People who used the service and the staff we spoke with told us that there were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs. The management team closely considered people’s needs and ensured sufficient staff were on duty each day and night.

Effective recruitment and selection procedures were in place and we saw that appropriate vetting checks had been undertaken before staff began work. The checks included obtaining references from previous employers to show staff employed were safe to work with vulnerable people.

We reviewed the systems for the management of medicines and found that people received their medicines safely. Medicines were closely managed and this ensured people received their medication exactly as prescribed.

The service was being totally refurbished and action was taken to ensure the building and equipment was maintained to a satisfactory standard. When issues were raised with the maintenance person these were dealt with straight away.

People’s care plans were tailored for them as individuals but the lack of a comprehensive assessment led staff to create numerous and often repetitive care plans. People were cared for by staff who knew them really well and understood how to support them.

Where people had difficulty making decisions we saw that staff gently supported them to work out what they felt was best. Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and had appropriately requested Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard (DoLS) authorisations. DoLS authorisations are used for people who need to be deprived of their liberty lawfully in their best interests to maintain their health and safety.

We observed that staff had developed very positive relationships with the people who used the service. The interactions between people and staff were jovial and supportive. Staff were kind and respectful and we saw that they were aware of how to respect people’s privacy and dignity. Staff sensitively supported people to deal with their personal care needs. People felt they would receive support from staff when needed. We found that a range of stimulating and engaging activities were provided at the service.

Sufficient staff were on duty to meet people’s needs and those receiving intermediate care were also supported by physiotherapists and occupational therapists. Staff across the home used the advice they provided to improve the care for all of the people. A training programme was in place that enabled staff to provide the care and support people needed. The regional manager and registered manager had introduced reflective practice, which is a system staff can use to consider how lessons can be learnt following all types of incidents and positive outcomes. Staff told us this practice actively supported them to develop and they felt empowered to raise an issue. Staff were all clear that they worked as a team and for the benefit of the people living at Eastbourne Care Home. The feedback from staff was used to assist the continuous improvement of the service.

The management team investigated even the smallest concern. We saw that they thoroughly looked at the concern and took prompt action to resolve them. They freely admitted where they had made mistakes and were very open and honest with people who raised issues. A couple of visitors discussed concerns that they had raised, prior to this provider being registered to operate the service which they felt had not been resolved. We discussed these with the registered manager, who told us they had not been raised with them but they would investigate and resolve these issues.

People told us they were offered plenty to eat and we observed staff assisted individuals to have sufficient healthy food and drinks to ensure their nutritional needs were met. The cook also provided a range of fortified meals for people who needed extra calories to maintain their weight.

People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare professionals and services. People were supported and encouraged to have regular health checks and were accompanied by staff or relatives to hospital appointments.

The registered manager had a clear vision about the direction of the service. They were committed and passionate about the people they supported and were constantly looking for ways to improve. Thorough and frequent quality assurance processes and audits ensured that all care and support was delivered in the safest and most effective way possible.

The registered manager actively sought feedback from people who used the service, relatives, staff and external agencies to measure the effectiveness of the service delivered and satisfaction levels.