CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Eastlake
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors found unsafe arrangements for some emergency medicines, incomplete guidance about diabetes risks, and medicines records that were not always completed promptly. They also found strengths in recruitment, safeguarding, infection control and emergency planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Governance systems did not reliably identify risks or check that actions had been completed. Communication about hospital discharges was not always effective, and some staff said they did not feel respected, supported or valued.
What inspectors found, January 2024
Eastlake is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found unsafe medicines arrangements and weak oversight, although people generally felt safe and were treated kindly.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 28 November and 5 December 2023. Inspectors reviewed safe care and how well the home was managed. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicines and management records.
The home was not always safe. Two people had emergency seizure medicines, but staff were not yet trained and assessed as competent to give them. Diabetes risks were not fully covered in care plans. Medicines records were not always signed at the right time, and the home did not always learn from incidents.
The home was also not well-led. Audits failed to find problems, and there was no reliable system to track whether actions after falls or other incidents had worked. Communication with hospitals was not always effective. Inspectors also found strengths: people felt safe, staff were recruited safely, the home was clean, and care was kind and respectful.
The overall rating changed from Good at the previous inspection, published in February 2020, to Requires Improvement. Only Safe and Well-led were inspected in this visit. The other three question ratings were not reassessed and were carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe at the home. Staff understood abuse and knew how to report concerns.
“People told us they felt safe living at the home.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people with dignity and respect. People also spoke positively about the care and support they received.
“Staff interacted with people in a kind and considerate manner, treating them with dignity and respect.” from the report
Safe recruitment and staffing
The required pre-employment checks had been completed. Inspectors found enough staff on duty and said staff usually responded quickly when people asked for help.
“Staff had been recruited safely. Pre-employment checks had been carried out, including references, proof of identity and Disclosure and Barring checks (DBS).” from the report
Community links
People were supported to keep in touch with family, friends and the local community. Local schools and community groups visited to chat and sing.
“People were supported to engage in home life and maintain contacts with family and friends.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and well kept. They were assured that infection prevention arrangements were in place.
“We observed the home as clean and well kept.” from the report
Emergency medicines
seriousTwo people had emergency medicines for prolonged seizures, but staff were not trained and assessed as competent to give them. This created a risk of serious harm.
“We found 2 people were prescribed rescue medicines to be used in emergencies, but staff were not trained and competent to be able to administer them which put people at risk of harm.” from the report
Diabetes risk planning
seriousCare plans did not give staff enough guidance on recognising and responding to low or high blood sugar. Updated plans were still being developed during the inspection.
“The provider had failed to assess and mitigate risks to people living with diabetes.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousAudits did not identify problems found by inspectors. The home did not consistently track whether actions after falls and other incidents had been completed and had worked.
“Governance processes were not operated effectively.” from the report
Communication and staff support
needs fixingCommunication with hospitals was not always effective when people returned from hospital. Inspectors also heard that some staff did not feel respected, supported or valued.
“There were weaknesses in communication so that care was more joined up.” from the report
- 01Have all staff who may need to give emergency seizure medicines now been trained and assessed as competent?
- 02What written guidance is now in place for recognising and responding to low or high blood sugar for each person with diabetes?
- 03How are medicines administration records checked to make sure staff sign them immediately after medicines are given?
- 04How does the home investigate incidents and track actions until it knows the risk has been reduced?
- 05What system is now used to make sure hospital discharge information is complete and passed promptly to the staff caring for the person?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other question ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection when calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 January 2024 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, September 2020
Eastlake was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control was being managed safely and found meaningful activities for residents.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 13 August 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found that the home was following safe infection control procedures. They were assured about visitors, social distancing, shielding, admissions, protective equipment, testing, cleaning, outbreak plans and the infection control policy.
Inspectors also found good practice in keeping residents engaged during restrictions. Welfare Assistants supported one-to-one and gardening activities.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give a full overall rating or rate all five areas of care.
Activities during restrictions
The home employed Welfare Assistants to help residents stay engaged when they could not use the local community. Activities included one-to-one support and gardening.
“At the start of the pandemic, the provider employed 'Welfare Assistants' to ensure that people had access to meaningful engagement and activities” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely and had arrangements to reduce and manage infections.
“We were assured the service were following safe infection prevention and control procedures to keep people safe.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are residents being supported with meaningful activities now, including one-to-one and gardening activities?
- 02How often is the infection prevention and control policy reviewed and updated?
- 03What arrangements are currently in place for visitors and social distancing?
- 04How are residents and staff tested for infections, and what happens if someone tests positive?
- 05How do you make sure protective equipment is used safely and supplies are available?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated overall or across the other care areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 September 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.
Every inspection of Eastlake
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- January 2024Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £980 to £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.