CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Frinton House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, June 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, strong leadership and safe systems, with only minor improvements still noted.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 1 and 6 February 2018. They reviewed records, medicines, staff files, care plans, risk assessments and quality checks. They spoke with staff, relatives and a health professional, and observed care.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines management, personalised support, good links with health professionals and a caring atmosphere.
This was a clear improvement from the previous two inspections, when the home was rated Requires Improvement and had breached regulations about record keeping, governance and decision-making under the Mental Capacity Act. At this inspection, the legal requirements were being met.
Personalised support
Staff understood people's communication, routines, preferences and behaviour. Care plans gave detailed guidance on how to support each person.
“Each person's care plan was specifically designed around their needs, goals and aspirations and reviewed regularly by people and their key-workers.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with dignity and compassion. Staff responded calmly when people were distressed and respected privacy and personal space.
“People were treated with utmost dignity and respect by kind and caring staff.” from the report
Health support
The home worked closely with health professionals and adapted arrangements when people found appointments difficult. Inspectors described an effective response to one person's complex health needs.
“There were excellent links with specialists to ensure guidance and support was obtained to meet people's complex needs.” from the report
Activities and personal goals
People were supported to take part in college, work, trips, hobbies and community activities. Staff helped people achieve personal ambitions.
“Staff worked hard to ensure people's dreams and aspirations were met.” from the report
Improved leadership
The home had strong quality checks and an open management approach. Inspectors found that earlier weaknesses in governance and decision-making had been addressed.
“There were robust quality assurance systems that looked at all aspects of the home and these had been effective at driving improvement.” from the report
New staff training
minorSome new staff had not yet completed safeguarding training at the inspection. The home had set a timescale for this to be completed.
“Some of the new staff had yet to complete this training as part of their induction to the home and there was a timescale set for completion.” from the report
Feedback methods
minorThe annual satisfaction surveys did not work particularly well for everyone. The home relied on meetings and other methods to understand people's views.
“The satisfaction surveys did not particularly suit everyone but the other systems including people and keyworker meetings were better opportunities to assess and review people's individual views on the care they received.” from the report
- 01Have all staff who support my relative completed safeguarding training, including staff who joined recently?
- 02How do you find out what people think if the standard satisfaction survey does not suit them?
- 03How will you keep my relative's care plan and communication guidance up to date?
- 04How do you support people who find health appointments or changes in routine difficult?
- 05What improvements have been made since the February 2018 inspection?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering both the premises and the care provided, with all five CQC questions rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 June 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.
What inspectors found, March 2017
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe and caring support, but legal consent processes and records were not reliable enough.
Inspectors visited without notice on 14 and 20 December 2016. They observed care, spoke with people and staff, and reviewed support plans, medicines, complaints, accidents, recruitment, training and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Caring. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines procedures, suitable recruitment checks and staff who knew people well. People were treated with warmth, kindness and respect.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Effective, Responsive and Well-led. Staff and managers were not always clear about consent, capacity and restrictions. Records about complaints, activities and person-centred care were not always accurate or complete.
The home had previously been in Special Measures and had received warning notices after the January 2016 inspection. It had made significant progress and was no longer in Special Measures, but it still breached regulations on consent and good governance.
Safe staffing and medicines
There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were stored, given, recorded and disposed of safely.
“There were enough staff working in the home to meet people's needs safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people as individuals and supported their privacy, dignity and personal choices.
“People were treated with respect and dignity.” from the report
Staff knew people's needs
Staff had a good understanding of people's communication, routines, interests and support needs.
“All of the staff had worked in the home for a long time and they were able to tell us about people's needs, choices, personal histories and interests.” from the report
More activities
People had more opportunities to attend college, day centres, trips and activities inside and outside the home.
“The range of activities on offer to people had greatly increased since our last inspection.” from the report
Improved monitoring
The provider had strengthened audits and action plans, which helped reduce the number of outstanding corrective actions.
“Records showed the numbers of corrective actions had steadily decreased over the past few months because quality monitoring had encouraged continuing improvement.” from the report
Consent and restrictions
seriousStaff and managers did not always understand the legal process for capacity, consent, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and restraint. Some assessments and best-interest decisions were missing or needed review.
“This showed a lack of understanding of the DoLS process.” from the report
Incomplete records
needs fixingRecords did not always show what action had been taken about complaints or activities. Paper and electronic complaint records did not match.
“Record keeping related to the management of complaints were not effective.” from the report
Choices were not always respected
needs fixingStaff sometimes answered for a person before allowing them time to respond. A decision to change chiropodist was not clearly shown to reflect everyone's wishes.
“On two occasions we saw staff answered for a person rather than waiting for them to respond themselves.” from the report
Delayed best-interest action
seriousA person was waiting for a medical procedure after the required best-interest process had not been completed promptly.
“However, this had not been done in a timely manner and the person was still awaiting this procedure.” from the report
- 01How do you assess and record whether each person has capacity to make specific decisions?
- 02How do you check that any Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications and restrictions are still necessary?
- 03How do you make sure lap belts, helmets or other restrictions are properly assessed as restraint?
- 04How are people's choices about activities and care recorded, especially when plans change?
- 05How are complaints recorded, investigated and communicated to the people who raised them?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, including all five key questions, to check improvements required after the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 March 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 Frinton House
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- June 2018Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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.