CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Cedarwood House Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, September 2022
Cedarwood House was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care and enough staff, but safety and management systems were not reliable.
The inspection was unannounced. One inspector visited on 16 and 18 August 2022. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicine records and quality records.
The home was not always safe. Diabetes support, risk assessments, care plans, accident records, fire evacuation plans and medicines records needed improvement. Medicines were not always stored, checked or recorded properly. These issues created an increased risk that people could be harmed.
There were enough staff, recruitment checks were completed, infection control was satisfactory, and staff treated people with kindness and respect. The new management team acted quickly on some concerns during the inspection, but monitoring and record-keeping systems were not yet reliable.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe was rated Requires Improvement, and Well-led remained Requires Improvement. The previous overall rating was Good, published on 26 March 2021.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to support people safely. Recruitment checks had also been completed before staff started work.
“There were enough staff to support people safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were kind, considerate and understood how to support people living with dementia or communication difficulties.
“Staff were kind and considerate to everyone they interacted with.” from the report
Infection control
The home was clean and hygienic, and inspectors were assured that infection prevention procedures were being followed.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Quick response during inspection
The manager acted on several concerns during the inspection, including putting a diabetes care plan and new medicine checks in place.
“The manager was responsive to the concerns we raised around people's safety and put measures in place during the inspection to protect people.” from the report
Diabetes and risk information
seriousOne person did not have a diabetes care plan, and blood sugar records had a long gap. Staff did not have enough information about how to recognise or respond to dangerous blood sugar levels.
“There was a gap in recording this person's blood sugar levels between December 2021 and August 2022.” from the report
Medicine safety
seriousMedicine records had gaps, medicines were not always stored correctly, and checks were not frequent enough. Inspectors found discrepancies in tablet amounts and no evidence of training for one medicine staff administered.
“The provider had failed to ensure the proper and safe management of medicines.” from the report
Care records and audits
seriousCare plans, mental capacity records, food and fluid charts and quality audits were incomplete or out of date. The home did not yet have one action plan to track all the improvements needed.
“The provider had failed to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided in carrying on of the regulated activity.” from the report
Fire evacuation records
seriousOne person did not have a personal emergency evacuation plan, and the emergency grab bag had out-of-date information. These records were corrected during the inspection.
“One person did not have a PEEP in place and the grab bag which would be used for emergency evacuation did not contain up to date information about people that lived at the home.” from the report
- 01What has been done to make sure every person with diabetes has a current care plan, with clear blood sugar limits and instructions for emergencies?
- 02How are medicines now checked, stored and recorded, and how are gaps in medication administration records followed up?
- 03Can we see the action plan responding to the breaches of Regulations 12 and 17, and how often is progress reviewed?
- 04Are all care plans, risk assessments, mental capacity records and best interest decisions now up to date?
- 05How are personal emergency evacuation plans and the emergency grab bag checked when people move in, move out or their needs change?
This inspection looked at Safe and Well-led, while the report did not provide separate ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 September 2022 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
Cedarwood House was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during the Covid-19 pandemic.
This was a targeted, announced inspection of infection prevention and control. The report says the inspection took place on 5 March 2021, although the front of the report gives 4 March 2021.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, arranging testing, managing admissions and isolating people when needed. They also found the home clean, with regular cleaning of frequently touched areas and good ventilation where possible.
People could keep in touch with family through phone calls, video calls and window visits. The home was reviewing its visiting policy and building a visiting pod. This inspection did not give a quality rating, so it is not the same as a full rated inspection.
Clean environment
The home was clean and tidy, with a cleaning schedule that included frequently touched areas.
“The home was clean and tidy throughout. There was a cleaning schedule and this included regular cleaning of high touch areas.” from the report
Protective equipment and testing
Staff had Covid-19 training and were seen using and disposing of protective equipment appropriately. Regular testing was taking place for people and staff.
“Staff had received specific Covid-19 training, and this included guidance for staff about how to put on and take off PPE safely.” from the report
Family contact
People were supported to stay in contact with friends and family through phone calls, video calls and window visits.
“People were supported to maintain regular contact with their friends and families. This was through phone and video calls and window visits.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What is the current visiting policy, and can visits now take place in the visiting pod mentioned in the report?
- 02How are people and staff currently tested for Covid-19, and what happens if someone tests positive?
- 03How are new residents currently admitted and supported during any isolation period?
- 04How will the home keep my family informed about my relative's wellbeing and any changes to visiting arrangements?
- 05What current ratings or inspection findings are available for caring, effective, responsive and well-led care, as these were not assessed in this inspection?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; Safe was inspected but not rated, and the other key questions were not assessed. 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 Cedarwood House Care Home
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- September 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 December 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.