CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Byway House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, staffing levels were sufficient and medicines were given safely. The premises were clean, equipment was checked and staff knew how to safeguard people.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had detailed assessments and received support from trained staff. Inspectors found good support with nutrition, health appointments, mobility, communication and decisions about care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They were involved in decisions about their care and supported to keep as much independence and control as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences and needs. People were supported to maintain relationships, take part in activities, raise complaints and receive personalised end of life support when needed.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear leadership, positive staff values and effective quality checks. The home worked with health professionals and used feedback and incidents to improve care.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with the overall rating lower than the previous Outstanding rating.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 20 January 2020. One inspector spoke with nine people, five staff members, relatives and health professionals. They reviewed care records, medicine records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicine systems, detailed care plans, clean premises and strong links with health professionals.
People and relatives gave consistently positive feedback. Inspectors found that staff knew people well, supported their choices and helped them stay independent and involved in meaningful activities.
The previous overall rating was Outstanding. It changed to Good at this inspection. The report does not identify any breaches or enforcement action.
Kind, personalised care
Staff knew people well and provided care based on their individual preferences, relationships and routines.
“People received personalised support from regular and committed staff.” from the report
Safety and staffing
Risks were assessed, equipment and premises were checked, and inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs.
“Risks to people's safety had been thoroughly assessed, monitored and managed so they were supported to stay safe.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was clean and tidy, with infection control training, cleaning schedules and good hygiene practices.
“The premises were extremely clean and tidy, and people were protected from the risk of infection.” from the report
Activities and independence
People were supported to continue interests, build relationships and try new experiences, including activities in the local community.
“People were supported to access activities that were meaningful to them and provided social interaction.” from the report
Strong leadership
The manager and staff team were described as open, committed and focused on people's wellbeing. Quality checks were used to identify and address issues.
“There was a robust governance framework in place and processes to drive quality.” from the report
Rating lower than before
minorThe overall rating changed from Outstanding to Good. Caring and Well-led also changed from Outstanding to Good, although inspectors still found both areas met the Good standard.
“The last rating for this service was outstanding (published 1 August 2017).” from the report
- 01How are my relative's specific needs, including dementia, Parkinson's, diabetes or mobility needs, reflected in their care plan?
- 02How is the paper medicines recording system checked, following the concerns with the electronic system?
- 03How would you support my relative to keep their independence and continue their existing interests and relationships?
- 04What changes followed the recent change in ownership, and how will families be kept informed?
- 05How will you involve my relative and our family in care reviews, activities and decisions about their support?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions; the report says all five ratings were assessed, and the previous overall rating was from 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 April 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.
What inspectors found, August 2017
Rated Outstanding overall; inspectors found exceptionally caring, person-centred support and very strong leadership, with a few minor issues to keep under review.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 11 May 2017. One inspector and an expert by experience observed care, spoke with people, relatives, visitors and staff, and checked care records, medicines records, staff files, rotas, training and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Responsive care. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines systems, trained staff, good support with food and healthcare, detailed care plans, activities and a complaints process that worked.
Caring and Well-led were rated Outstanding. Inspectors found warm and respectful relationships, strong involvement of people in decisions and in developing the home, and an open management culture. The overall rating improved from Good at the previous inspection in January 2015 to Outstanding.
Kind and respectful care
Staff were described as genuinely caring and went beyond routine duties to make people happy and maintain important relationships and interests.
“Staff went the extra mile and the registered manager gave us examples of when staff spent time with people even when they were not due to come into work.” from the report
People have a real say
People were involved in care decisions and in running the home. They could attend meetings, join training and interview potential staff.
“People were involved in developing the service through attendance at residents' meetings, attending staff training and in interviewing new staff.” from the report
Strong leadership
The home had an open culture, supportive management and systems to check care quality and make improvements.
“Excellent management and leadership were evident.” from the report
Good daily support
Inspectors found safe risk management, sufficient staffing, safe medicines systems, detailed care planning and access to healthcare.
“People's risks were identified, assessed and managed appropriately.” from the report
Choice and activities
People could choose meals and activities, join outings and take part in events based on their interests.
“Organised activities were structured based on people's preferences and we observed some musical entertainment which was enjoyed by several people at the time of our inspection.” from the report
Medicines room temperature
minorThe medicines room was at 23°C, close to the 25°C level above which medicines may lose effectiveness. Management immediately recorded action to obtain a fan or similar equipment.
“On the day of our inspection, the temperature within the medicines room was 23 degrees Celsius, which is close to the maximum temperature of 25 degrees Celsius, beyond which medicines may start to lose their efficacy.” from the report
Personal histories not yet complete
minorMost people had a personal history in their care records, but the home was still working to ensure this was done for everyone.
“Personal histories had been recorded for the majority of people, but the registered manager said they were working to ensure every person had a personal history in place.” from the report
- 01What action was taken after the medicines room was found to be at 23°C, and how are temperatures checked now?
- 02Have personal histories now been completed for every resident, and how are they used in daily care?
- 03How do you decide staffing levels when residents' needs change or agency staff are needed?
- 04How will my relative and our family be involved in writing and reviewing the care plan?
- 05Which activities and outings would be suitable for my relative, and how do you support people who do not want to join group activities?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and providing a new overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 August 2017 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of Byway House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2020Goodcurrent ratingdown from OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 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
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.