CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Eastbank
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk assessments and safe medicines systems. Staff understood how to respond to abuse concerns and reduce risks such as choking and infection.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the training and skills needed to support people, and worked with health and social care professionals. People were supported with food, drinks, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff understood how people communicated and how to provide reassurance, privacy and support for independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and reviewed with people. Staff supported individual activities, holidays, communication needs, contact with others and end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider and registered manager were regularly involved and approachable. Quality checks, surveys and staff feedback were used to monitor and improve care.
What inspectors found, May 2019
Eastbank rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with redecoration still under way.
This was an unannounced inspection on 2 May 2019 by one inspector. The inspector observed care, spoke with people living at the home, staff, the provider, the registered manager and relatives. They also checked care records, medicines records, recruitment files, complaints and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practices, suitable risk assessments and clean surroundings. Staff were trained and understood people's needs, including their communication preferences and health needs.
People were described as happy and well cared for. Staff supported choice, independence, activities, family contact and religious practices. The report says the home was rated Good overall at the previous inspection, published in October 2016.
Kind and respectful care
People said they were well cared for. Staff understood how to reassure people when they were anxious or upset.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans gave staff guidance about each person's needs and preferences. People were supported to make choices and do activities they enjoyed.
“Care plans were very person centred and supported staff with guidance, so staff understood people's individual care requirements.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Staff who gave medicines were trained and checked as competent. Inspectors found enough staff when people wanted assistance.
“People were receiving their medicines when they should. The provider was following safe protocols for the receipt, storage, administration and disposal of medicines.” from the report
Good leadership
People, relatives and staff found the provider and registered manager approachable. The service collected feedback and carried out checks on care quality.
“People, relatives and staff told us they saw the provider and registered manager regularly and found them approachable.” from the report
Tired decoration
minorInspectors said the home environment and décor looked tired. The provider had started a redecoration programme and planned improvements to the home and garden.
“The home environment and décor were looking tired.” from the report
- 01How far has the redecoration programme progressed, and what improvements are planned for the garden?
- 02How will you assess and support my relative's preferred way of communicating?
- 03How will you make sure my relative's medicines are given as prescribed and checked regularly?
- 04What activities, holidays and opportunities for independence would be available for my relative?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in reviewing care and planning end of life wishes?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, based on observations, discussions and checks of selected records. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 May 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, October 2016
Rated Good in every area; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care in a well-run home.
This was an unannounced inspection on 26 September 2016. One inspector observed care, spoke with people, relatives, staff and a health professional, and checked care records, medicines, complaints and quality checks.
The home supported seven people with learning disabilities, physical disabilities and dementia. Inspectors found that people were kept safe, received their medicines properly, and were supported by trained staff who understood their needs.
People were involved in decisions about their care and were encouraged to stay independent. Inspectors also found positive relationships, support for hobbies and interests, and action taken when people's health or needs changed.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
Personalised safety
People and relatives were involved in decisions about risks. The home made practical changes to help people remain safe without unnecessarily limiting their freedom.
“People were involved in decisions about how to keep them safe.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff received training relevant to the needs of the people living in the home, including dementia, epilepsy, medicines and nutrition.
“The training staff received was relevant to the needs of the people living at Eastbank.” from the report
Respect and choice
People were encouraged to make their own choices and remain independent. Staff accepted people's differences and supported their preferred lifestyles.
“People were supported by staff who valued diversity. People's privacy was maintained.” from the report
Responding to changing needs
Staff noticed changes in people's health and arranged assessments or other support when needed. They also adapted routines and activities to people's changing needs.
“People's changing health and wellbeing needs were responded to.” from the report
Strong oversight
The manager was trusted by people, relatives and staff and checked the quality of care through regular audits, feedback and observations.
“The manager routinely monitored the quality of care provided to people.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently assess and review risks for someone whose mobility, dementia or physical health is changing?
- 02How are medicines reviewed, and how do you check that staff remain competent to administer them?
- 03What training do staff currently have for epilepsy, dementia, nutrition and any needs specific to my relative?
- 04How do you involve people and relatives in care plans, menu choices and decisions about independence?
- 05What changes have been made to the home since the 26 September 2016 inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC areas and including observations, discussions and checks of care, medicines, complaints and quality records. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 October 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 Eastbank
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 January 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
11 live-in carers within about an hour of Herefordshire, County of
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 £960 to £1,410 a week. 10 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.