CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Easterbrook Farm
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found comprehensive risk assessments, suitable safeguarding training and safe systems for medicines, staffing, recruitment and infection control. Staff knew people well and could recognise when someone might be worried or unwell.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had personalised care plans and staff received relevant training, supervision and competency checks. The rating improved from Requires Improvement at the last inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors found kind and compassionate care. Staff used respectful communication, supported people's choices and respected privacy, dignity, equality and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was tailored to people's needs, communication styles, goals and preferences. People were supported to take part in activities, develop skills, maintain relationships and try new things.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found visible and approachable leadership, effective quality checks and a culture focused on people's rights, choices and improvement. Families and staff were regularly involved and kept informed.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with effectiveness improved from Requires Improvement.
The inspection took place on 12 January 2023 and was announced 48 hours in advance. One inspector spoke with seven people, six staff members and four relatives. They also reviewed care records, staff recruitment files, training information and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that staff knew people well, supported their choices and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect.
The home supports up to 12 adults with learning disabilities. Inspectors found personalised care plans, good communication support, suitable risk assessments, safe medicine systems and regular involvement from health professionals. The Effective rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection in 2017.
People feel safe
Staff knew people well and understood how to protect them from abuse and avoidable harm. Risk assessments covered the support provided and were reviewed regularly.
“There were comprehensive risk assessments in place covering all aspects of the service and support provided.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors found warm, respectful relationships between staff and people living in the home. Staff responded calmly to people's emotions and sensory needs.
“People received kind and compassionate care from staff who used positive, respectful language which people understood and responded well to.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, develop skills, take part in activities and build relationships. Staff aimed to help people lead meaningful lives.
“People had the opportunity to try new experiences, develop new skills and gain independence.” from the report
Skilled staff and leadership
Staff received training about learning disabilities, autism, communication and positive behaviour support. Inspectors found effective leadership and quality monitoring.
“People were supported by staff who had received relevant and good quality training in evidence-based practice.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you support my relative's preferred way of communicating, including any visual aids, signing, gestures or symbols?
- 02How would you involve my relative and our family in reviewing care plans, risk assessments and future goals?
- 03What activities, work or opportunities would be available to help my relative develop skills and independence?
- 04How are medicines reviewed, particularly if they affect behaviour or are used for people with a learning disability or autism?
- 05How can we raise a concern or complaint, and how would you keep us informed about the response?
The inspection covered all five key questions and included infection prevention and control; the previous Effective rating of Requires Improvement changed to Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 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, October 2017
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but the Effective rating requires improvement.
This was a comprehensive inspection on 18 and 25 July 2017. The first day was unannounced. The inspector met all 12 people living at the home, spoke with eight people, seven families, staff and health professionals, and checked care, medicine and staff records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were rated Good. Inspectors found that medicines were stored, given and recorded safely. People were treated kindly, supported to be independent, and helped to take part in activities they enjoyed.
The Effective rating was Requires Improvement. A new staff member was due to work a night shift before completing their induction and training. The manager changed the rota during the inspection. Some care records also still contained general risks rather than risks specific to the individual.
After the inspection, concerns about care and treatment were referred to the local authority safeguarding team. The provider reviewed hand-over arrangements and increased staffing at hand-over times.
Safe medicines
Inspectors found that medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. This was an improvement since the previous inspection.
“At this inspection, we found the provider had taken action to ensure that medicine administration and storage was now safe.” from the report
Kind, respectful care
People were happy and relaxed with staff. Staff knew their preferences, respected privacy and encouraged independence.
“People were treated with kindness and compassion in their day-to-day care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's routines, interests and communication needs. People were supported to choose activities, including work on the farm.
“Care plans were personalised and detailed daily routines, likes and dislikes specific to each person.” from the report
Good family involvement
Relatives were involved in care planning and could visit at times that suited them. The home also used meetings and surveys to gather views.
“Relatives were also involved in developing people's care, support and treatment plans.” from the report
Positive leadership
The manager was well liked and worked with staff to improve the service. People were involved in activities such as interviewing new staff.
“The service had a positive culture that was person-centred, open, inclusive and empowering.” from the report
Induction before night work
needs fixingA new staff member was due to work a night shift after reading only three of 12 care plans and before completing all training. The manager changed the rota and agreed that new staff would complete induction before night duty in future.
“The new member of staff did not have all the training necessary to ensure they would be able to carry out a night shift effectively and safely.” from the report
Generic risk information
needs fixingSome care records still described general risks rather than the risks faced by the individual. The manager had started reviewing the records but had not completed all of them.
“We found that some care records still described generic risks rather than risks to the individual.” from the report
Shift hand-over arrangements
needs fixingAfter the inspection, concerns about care and treatment led the local authority safeguarding team to ask the provider to review hand-over arrangements. The provider increased staffing during hand-over periods.
“Following their investigation, they asked the provider to review their hand-over arrangements between shifts.” from the report
- 01Have all new staff now completed their induction and required training before working night shifts?
- 02Have all care plans and risk assessments been reviewed so they describe each person's actual risks rather than general risks?
- 03What changes were made to shift hand-over arrangements after the local authority safeguarding investigation?
- 04How are staffing levels decided at hand-over times and how are these checked?
- 05How will the new monthly quality assurance audits identify and follow up any further concerns?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, based on visits, discussions, observations and samples of four care records, four medicine records and two staff records. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 October 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.
Every inspection of Easterbrook Farm
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.