CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Evergreen
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during a targeted Covid-19 inspection.
Inspectors visited on 12 February 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.
They found the home was clean and tidy. Staff had enough personal protective equipment and used it safely. Testing, cleaning, social distancing and arrangements for people who were unwell or isolating were in place.
The overall service and Safe question were marked “Inspected but not rated”. The inspection did not provide a full quality rating for the home.
Clean environment
The home was clean and tidy. Its cleaning schedule included regular cleaning of frequently touched areas.
“The home was clean and tidy throughout. There was a cleaning schedule which had been updated to include regular cleaning of high-touch areas such as door handles and light switches.” from the report
PPE and testing
Staff had plenty of PPE and used and disposed of it appropriately. Regular Covid-19 testing was completed for people living in the home and staff.
“Staff had access to plenty of personal protective equipment (PPE) and were seen to be using and disposing of this appropriately. Regular testing for people and staff was completed.” from the report
Managing isolation
People who had tested positive, were unwell or were self-isolating were cared for in their own rooms to reduce the risk of infection spreading.
“When people had tested positive for Covid-19, were unwell or self-isolating they were cared for in their own rooms to minimise the risk of spreading the virus.” from the report
Maintaining contact
People were supported to keep in touch with friends and family by phone and, where suitable, video calls. Staff also supported individual activities.
“People were supported to maintain contact with friends and family through phone, and where appropriate, video calls.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently managed, and how can my relative keep in contact with family?
- 02What testing and infection control arrangements are currently used for people living in the home and staff?
- 03What happens if a resident tests positive, becomes unwell or needs to self-isolate?
- 04How are new admissions tested and supported during any isolation period?
- 05How are residents' preferred activities and support needs recorded and reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; it was not a full inspection and the other areas were not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 February 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.
What inspectors found, February 2018
Rated Good overall, but inspectors found the home was not consistently well-led and records and checks still needed improvement.
Inspectors made an unannounced comprehensive inspection visit on 4 and 5 December 2017. They reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files, complaints, audits and other records. They also spoke with people living at the home, visitors, staff and health and social care professionals.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective, caring and responsive care. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, kind staff, personalised care, good food choices and appropriate support with health needs.
The well-led question was rated Requires Improvement. Records did not always show the full support people received. Some audits were missed or did not identify problems. Mental capacity records and cream charts were also not consistently complete. The report says improvements had been made since 2016, but needed more time to become fully established.
Kind and personal care
Staff knew people well and understood their personal histories, choices, cultural needs and routines. Inspectors saw respectful and compassionate interactions.
“People were supported by staff who were kind and caring and had a good understanding of people's needs.” from the report
Safety and staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Risks were assessed and staff understood how to keep people safe.
“There were enough staff to support people safely.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People had choices of food and drinks suited to their needs and preferences. Staff monitored health changes and involved healthcare professionals when needed.
“People were supported to eat and drink a variety of food that met their individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's histories, interests, beliefs, routines, likes and dislikes. People and relatives were involved in decisions about care.
“The care plans were relevant to the person and their needs.” from the report
Incomplete records
needs fixingDaily records and isolation charts did not fully show the support and engagement people received. Records did not include enough information about moods or daily activities.
“We found that people's daily records and isolation charts were task based and did not reflect the full support and engagement people received.” from the report
Audits did not always find problems
needs fixingSome audits had not been completed, while others failed to identify issues found by inspectors. This weakened the home's checks on quality.
“There were a range of audits in place but these had not always identified areas that needed improvement.” from the report
Mental capacity records
needs fixingMental capacity assessments did not always show how people with fluctuating capacity could make decisions. The report says this did not affect people, but further work was needed.
“Mental capacity assessments did not demonstrate how people who had fluctuating capacity were able to make decisions.” from the report
Activities and cream charts
minorThe home had started work to improve meaningful activities, especially for people staying in their rooms. Records for people needing body creams were not consistently completed.
“Records for people who required body creams were not well completed.” from the report
- 01What has changed to make daily records show people's mood, engagement and the support they receive?
- 02How do you now check that mental capacity assessments are complete, especially when a person's capacity changes?
- 03How often are infection control, medicines and other quality audits completed, and how do you check they identify problems?
- 04What one-to-one activities are available for people who stay in their rooms or do not enjoy group activities?
- 05How do you make sure cream charts are completed every time creams are given?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions and both the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 February 2018 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 Evergreen
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
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
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.