CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Amber House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found detailed risk assessments, clear guidance for staff, good safeguarding knowledge and suitable infection control arrangements. They did not review the whole Safe key question.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not assessed during the targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not assessed during the targeted inspection, although inspectors observed kind and respectful interactions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not assessed during the targeted inspection, although care plans recorded people's likes, dislikes and individual wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found approachable managers, regular audits and systems for learning from incidents. They did not review the whole Well-led key question.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Inspected but not rated; the targeted visit found clear risk guidance, kind care and effective infection controls.
This was a targeted inspection on 20 April 2021. Inspectors looked at a specific concern about how risks were assessed and managed. They also checked infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors spoke with four people, relatives, staff and medical professionals. They reviewed care records, risk assessments, policies and management records. They found detailed risk assessments, staff who understood safeguarding, and systems for learning from accidents and incidents.
People said they felt safe and were treated with dignity. Inspectors found that people were supported to make choices and take part in activities. They also found the home clean and were assured that infection control arrangements were suitable.
The home was inspected but not rated at this visit. Its previous overall rating was Good, published in July 2019, and that rating remained unchanged. The other areas of care will be assessed at a future comprehensive inspection.
Clear risk guidance
Care records contained detailed assessments covering health needs, eating behaviours linked to Prader-Willi Syndrome, falls and distress. Staff had clear instructions about how to support people safely.
“Risk assessments gave clear, structured guidance to staff detailing how to safely support people.” from the report
Safeguarding awareness
Staff had received safeguarding training and knew how to report concerns. The manager had also worked appropriately with external bodies during investigations.
“Staff had undertaken safeguarding training and demonstrated a good awareness of what to do if they had any concerns about people's safety.” from the report
Respectful support
Inspectors saw warm and kind interactions. People were supported to make choices, take part in activities and maintain independence.
“We observed kind and warm interactions between all staff and people.” from the report
Learning from incidents
The management team reviewed accidents and incidents for patterns. Staff discussed incidents in team meetings and follow-up actions were recorded.
“Accidents and incidents were analysed by management to look for any trends or patterns and raised with the relevant statutory bodies if required, for example the Local Authority.” from the report
Infection control
The home was clean and tidy. Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, testing, protective equipment, social distancing and visits.
“We were assured that the provider was preventing visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you check that staff are following each person's risk assessment in day-to-day care?
- 02What specific support is available for eating behaviours linked to Prader-Willi Syndrome?
- 03How do you recognise and respond when a person becomes distressed?
- 04What changes were made after the accident and incident audits, and how do you check that they have worked?
- 05When is the next comprehensive inspection expected, and which ratings will it review?
This was a targeted inspection of specific parts of Safe and Well-led, including infection control; the other key questions were not assessed and the previous overall Good rating carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 May 2021 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.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Amber House was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care for people with Prader-Willi Syndrome.
This was the first inspection since the home registered in May 2018. One inspector visited on 22 May 2019, after giving 24 hours’ notice. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care plans, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
Inspectors found Good care in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were supported by staff who understood their needs, including the food management and health risks linked to Prader-Willi Syndrome.
People were treated with kindness and supported to make choices, stay independent and take part in activities. The home had systems to manage risks, medicines, staffing, complaints and quality checks. No breaches of regulations were reported.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe and knew how to raise concerns. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse.
“People and relatives told us they felt the home was a safe place to be and felt comfortable to raise concerns with staff.” from the report
Specialist knowledge
Staff had training and knowledge about Prader-Willi Syndrome, including its food and health risks. They also received wider care training and support.
“Specialist training was provided to ensure people's needs could be met and refresher courses were booked when due.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw friendly interactions. People were supported with dignity, privacy, choices and independence.
“People and relatives told us that staff treated them with kindness and we observed friendly interactions throughout the day.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's individual needs, preferences and communication styles. People were offered activities and support to maintain relationships.
“People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs.” from the report
Good management checks
The provider used audits, reviews and feedback to check the quality of care and identify improvements.
“The provider carried out quality assurance audits to ensure good quality care was maintained.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you manage access to the kitchen and fridge while supporting each person's choices and independence?
- 02How do you monitor people's weight, food intake and exercise, and how often are these plans reviewed?
- 03What training do staff receive about Prader-Willi Syndrome and behaviours that can challenge?
- 04How will you support my relative to move around a home spread over five floors with stair access?
- 05How are people involved in reviewing their care plans and choosing their daily activities?
This was a scheduled inspection of the whole service, including the care provided and the premises, and it assessed all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 July 2019 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 Amber House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- May 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 May 2018.
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
19 live-in carers within about an hour of East 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 £1,000 to £1,400 a week. 13 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“When he point blank refused to go into hospital for a life saving blood transfusion she talked him through the situation and agreed to go in the ambulance with him and stayed until he was settled.”
“Una felt safe, secure and loved in her time with Debbie which is a gift that I am eternally grateful for.”
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.