CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Bethune Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were identified and managed, staff understood safeguarding responsibilities, medicines were administered safely and infection control arrangements were effective. There were enough suitable staff to provide care safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found effective quality checks, clear management oversight and a positive, person-centred culture. The home used incidents and audits to identify improvements.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Bethune Court rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and strong management, with some staff vacancies and ongoing work to reduce falls.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 20 December 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at Safe and Well-led, including infection control. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff records and management audits.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines systems, well-managed risks and effective safeguarding arrangements. People and relatives spoke positively about the care and said staff were kind, attentive and knew people well.
The home had some vacant posts and used agency staff when needed. Inspectors also noted that the provider had identified a higher than expected number of falls and was taking steps to reduce them. The overall Good rating remained because the other three areas were not inspected at this visit and their previous ratings were carried forward.
Safe care and risk management
Risks were assessed and reviewed, including risks linked to health conditions and falls. Staff used least restrictive approaches while supporting people's independence.
“Risks to people were identified and assessed. There were systems in place to ensure risks were monitored and staff understood measures that were in place to reduce and manage risks.” from the report
Kind and attentive staff
People and relatives consistently praised staff. Inspectors observed staff spending time with people and treating them kindly.
“We noted that people appeared relaxed in the company of staff who were attentive and kind in their approach.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Only trained and assessed staff administered medicines. Records, storage, audits and procedures for covert medicines were found to be safe.
“There were safe and effective systems in place for the administration of medicines.” from the report
Strong management oversight
The manager understood the home's risks and priorities. Audits and reviews were used to improve care, including actions to reduce falls.
“The registered manager demonstrated clear oversight of the service.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infection outbreaks, including safe use of protective equipment.
“We were assured that the provider was responding effectively to risks and signs of infection.” from the report
Staff vacancies
minorThere were vacant posts at the time of the inspection. The home was recruiting and used agency staff when permanent staff could not cover shifts.
“The registered manager told us there were some vacant posts but they were in the process of recruiting.” from the report
- 01How many permanent staff are currently in post, and how often are agency staff used?
- 02What were the causes of the higher than expected number of falls, and what results have the prevention measures produced?
- 03How will staff make sure my relative's individual risk assessments are followed and kept up to date?
- 04How are medicines checked, including any medicines given covertly?
- 05How will my family be involved in reviews of care plans and risks?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection control; the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 February 2023 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, March 2021
Bethune Court: targeted infection control inspection found good Covid-19 arrangements, but the service was inspected and not rated.
Inspectors visited on 16 March 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection after a coronavirus outbreak had ended. They looked at infection prevention and control arrangements rather than the whole service.
Inspectors were assured that visitors, new admissions, residents and staff were protected through screening, testing, social distancing and suitable protective equipment. They also found that the home had effective cleaning, hygiene and outbreak procedures.
People were supported to keep in touch with relatives through video calls and carefully arranged visits. Staff also supported residents with memorials and remembrance after the outbreak. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Infection control
The provider had contingency plans and infection control procedures that inspectors found had managed the outbreak effectively.
“The providers contingency planning and effective infection control procedures had ensured that the outbreak was well managed.” from the report
Family contact
People were helped to keep in touch with relatives through video calls and visits arranged to reduce infection risk.
“People were well supported by staff to maintain contact with their family and loved ones.” from the report
Staff training and checks
Three infection control champions helped improve staff knowledge and carried out weekly checks on infection control practice.
“Care staff who had undertaken IPC champion training completed weekly quality assurance checks and shared good practice with staff” from the report
Emotional support
Staff recognised the emotional impact of the outbreak and supported residents to remember people and grieve together.
“Staff had supported residents with memorials, shared stories and remembrance to give an opportunity for those to grieve and come together.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are the infection control champions carrying out quality checks now?
- 02How do you currently manage visits from relatives and reduce the risk of infection?
- 03What testing arrangements are in place for residents and staff?
- 04What is the current plan for managing a new infection outbreak?
- 05How do you support residents emotionally if visiting restrictions or an outbreak return?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 March 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.
Every inspection of Bethune Court
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 2010.
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.