CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Aldingbourne Cottage
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable safeguarding, risk management, staffing, recruitment and medicines systems. Cleaning was generally appropriate, although the unexpected early departure of the cleaner affected the appearance of some areas.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- Staff were trained and supported, and people had suitable care and healthcare support. However, there was limited evidence of capacity assessments and best-interest decisions, and some parts of the building needed improvement.
- Caring?
- Good
- People, relatives and professionals described staff as kind, caring and friendly. Staff respected people's choices, privacy, dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised. People had accessible communication tools, activities, community opportunities and support to maintain important relationships.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear leadership, regular staff support and effective quality checks. The manager acted promptly on issues raised during the inspection.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but the Effective rating was Requires Improvement because mental capacity records were incomplete.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 26 November 2019. One inspector and a specialist adviser spoke with people, staff, the manager, relatives and a health professional. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files, rotas, training records and other management documents.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were also rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine arrangements, detailed care plans, kind support and a good range of activities. People were supported to make choices, maintain relationships and access the community.
Effective was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found limited written evidence of mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions. They also found a damaged carpet, tired bathrooms and a damp smell near the wet room. The carpet was replaced, bathrooms were redecorated and wet-room works were commissioned after the inspection.
The home was rated Good at the previous inspection, published on 14 June 2017. The Effective rating had fallen from Good to Requires Improvement, while the other four question ratings remained Good.
Kind and respectful support
People and relatives described staff as caring and friendly. Inspectors saw that staff respected people's choices, privacy, dignity and independence.
“The staff in the team seem to be very caring and friendly” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans gave staff detailed guidance about people's needs, communication and preferences. People and relatives were involved in reviewing their care.
“People's care plans were accurate and detailed. They provided staff with enough guidance to enable them to meet people's needs.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff on duty and appropriate recruitment checks. Medicines records were completed properly and audited regularly.
“Medicine Administration Records had been appropriately completed and were audited regularly.” from the report
Activities and community links
People had activities inside and outside the home, including day services, local events and visits. Staff also supported people to maintain family relationships.
“Records showed people regularly attended local sporting and cultural events they were interested in.” from the report
Prompt action on building issues
The home responded quickly when inspectors raised the damaged carpet and bathroom concerns. The carpet was replaced, bathrooms were redecorated and wet-room work was commissioned.
“Following feedback, at the end of our inspection, prompt action was taken to address and resolve these issues.” from the report
Mental capacity records
needs fixingThere was not enough written evidence that capacity assessments had been completed. Best-interest decisions were not consistently recorded, so the service was asked to review its practice.
“However, there was a lack of evidence to show that capacity assessments had been completed.” from the report
Condition of some areas
minorAt the inspection, a carpet was torn and could have caused a trip. Bathrooms needed redecoration and there was a damp, musty smell near the wet room. The report says action was taken afterwards.
“In particular, we found there was a damp musty smell present in areas near the service's wet room.” from the report
- 01Have all required mental capacity assessments now been completed and recorded?
- 02How are best-interest decisions documented and checked?
- 03Has the wet room been replaced as planned, and have the bathrooms remained in good condition?
- 04How do you make sure staffing levels remain sufficient when a member of staff leaves unexpectedly?
- 05What activities and community outings would be available for my relative's interests and communication needs?
This was an unannounced inspection of the whole care home, covering all five CQC questions, its premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 January 2020 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.
Every inspection of Aldingbourne Cottage
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 May 2016.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £1,020 to £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.