CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at East Fields
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe recruitment, reviewed risk assessments and safe medicines management. The home was clean and accidents and incidents were reviewed for lessons.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans were based on people's needs and choices and were reviewed regularly. Staff had relevant induction, training and supervision, and people were supported with food, health needs and independence.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- People were treated with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. Staff supported people to make decisions, maintain friendships and develop confidence and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records were detailed and tailored to each person. The home offered flexible stays, accessible communication and activities based on people's interests.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- Inspectors found exceptional leadership, a strong person-centred culture and motivated staff. Audits, meetings and feedback were used to monitor quality and improve the service.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rated Outstanding overall; inspectors found exceptionally kind, personalised care and strong leadership.
This was a planned inspection of the respite care home. Inspectors visited on 4 June and 14 June 2019. They spoke with people using the service, staff and relatives, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home supported people with learning disabilities and/or autism for short respite stays. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with exceptional kindness and supported to make choices, build skills and become more independent.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Caring and well-led were rated Outstanding. Safe, effective and responsive were rated Good. The previous overall rating was Good, published in December 2016.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives gave consistently positive feedback. Inspectors saw staff supporting people in a kind, compassionate and empowering way.
“Staff showed exceptional standards of kindness towards the people they supported” from the report
Choice and independence
People were encouraged to make choices and learn practical skills. This included cooking, managing money and taking more control of their medicines.
“People had been supported to become more independent through staff encouraging and motivating them to develop and learn new skills.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans included detailed information about each person's needs and preferences. The home also arranged flexible stays and activities around people's interests.
“Care records were incredibly detailed and specific to the individual's needs.” from the report
Strong leadership
Inspectors found a clear vision, highly motivated staff and effective checks on quality. The manager shared learning and looked for ways to improve people's outcomes.
“There was organisational oversight of the service.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Medicine records were accurate and staff received training and competency checks. People were encouraged to self-administer when this could be done safely.
“We found these were accurately completed and showed that people received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you find out what my relative wants from each respite stay?
- 02How will you support my relative to develop independence while respecting their choice to rest or not join activities?
- 03How will you communicate with my relative if they need pictures, simple language or sign language?
- 04How will you support my relative to self-administer medicines, and how will you check this remains safe?
- 05How will you respond if my relative becomes unwell or needs urgent medical help during a stay?
This was a planned inspection covering all five key questions, with visits on 04 June 2019 and 14 June 2019. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 August 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.
What inspectors found, December 2016
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised support, with no breaches identified.
Inspectors visited on 24 November 2016. The visit was announced because the home provided short breaks. One inspector observed care, spoke with four people, three care staff and managers, and checked care, staff and quality records.
The home supported up to eight people, with five people staying during the visit. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, supported to take medicines safely and helped by suitable, trained staff.
People were treated with dignity and supported to make choices. Their care reflected their likes, needs and communication methods. They could join activities, use the community and raise complaints.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. The previous inspection in May 2014 had found no breaches in the regulations examined.
Safe support
Risks were assessed and care plans recorded how to reduce them. Inspectors saw suitable equipment, emergency plans and enough staff to support people safely.
“Risk assessments were in place regarding people's assessed needs.” from the report
Medicines
The home assessed the support each person needed with medicines. Records showed when medicines had been given or why they had not been given.
“This ensured that a clear audit trail was in place to monitor when people had taken their prescribed medicines.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff received ongoing training, supervision and support. Inspectors found that staff understood people's needs and could support them effectively.
“Staff had the necessary skills and training to meet people's needs and promote their wellbeing and independence.” from the report
Personalised care
Staff knew people's likes, dislikes, preferences and communication methods. People were supported to make choices, maintain independence and take part in activities they enjoyed.
“People were supported in their preferred way to promote their independence.” from the report
Listening and improvement
People and their representatives could give feedback and make complaints. The home used quality checks and acted when audits identified improvements.
“We saw that where actions were identified these had been taken.” from the report
DoLS applications pending
minorSome people could not understand risks to their safety and were not safe to go out without support. Applications had been made, but no DoLS authorisation was in place at the time of the inspection.
“None of the people that used the service had a DoLS authorisation in place at the time of our visit.” from the report
Staffing review
minorThe home was reviewing staffing levels because some people needed additional support. Inspectors found extra staff were provided when needed during the visit.
“The manager told us that the staffing levels were determined by the contractual obligations with the funding authority but were in the process of being reviewed.” from the report
- 01How will you make sure staffing levels meet each person's needs, especially when someone requires additional support or waking-night staff?
- 02What is the current progress of the DoLS applications mentioned in the report?
- 03How will my relative be involved in planning and reviewing their support?
- 04How do you record and review medicines when my relative stays at the home?
- 05Which activities and community outings could my relative take part in?
This was an announced inspection of the overall quality of the short break service, including all five CQC questions and records about care, staff and quality monitoring. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 December 2016 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 East Fields
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- August 2019Outstandingcurrent ratingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 March 2011.
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
62 live-in carers within about an hour of Derbyshire
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 £1,010 to £1,260 a week. 51 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.