CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Futures
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, May 2018
Futures was rated Good overall, but safe care Requires Improvement because some incident records were incomplete and adhesive patch positions were not recorded.
Inspectors visited the home on 6 February 2018. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines, incident records, staff files and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led care were all rated Good. People were described as safe, well supported and treated with kindness and respect.
Safe care was rated Requires Improvement. Some incident and accident records did not show the outcome or confirm that they had been checked. Inspectors also found no records showing where medicine patches had been placed, which could increase the risk of using the same site again.
The overall rating stayed Good, the same as at the previous inspection on 3 February 2015. The report says the home needed to improve its recording and external scrutiny of incidents.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke highly of the staff. Inspectors saw staff communicate gently, protect privacy and support emotional needs.
“Staff showed kindness and supported people's emotional needs.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans described people's preferences, communication methods, routines and goals. Staff knew people well and followed this guidance.
“Care plans were detailed and comprehensive, covering all aspects of people's lives.” from the report
Support for independence
People were encouraged to make choices, develop life skills and use equipment or technology to communicate and move around more independently.
“Staff demonstrated throughout the inspection that they understood the importance of supporting people to be as independent as possible” from the report
Specialist health support
People could access specialist nurses, therapists and other clinicians based on the same site. Staff worked effectively with health professionals.
“This meant that people had access to specialist nurses, dieticians, psychologists, physiotherapists, SALTS, and occupational therapists whenever they needed them.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to follow their interests, go into the community, continue education where appropriate and stay in touch with family and friends.
“People were leading full and busy lives.” from the report
Incomplete incident records
needs fixingSome incident and accident records did not include the outcome or show that they had been signed off. This meant the manager could not be sure every incident and minor injury had been fully investigated.
“Not all records had been completed with the outcome and signed off by the nurse in line with the provider's system.” from the report
External scrutiny of incidents
needs fixingIncidents were dealt with promptly, but the home had not always considered whether they needed proper external scrutiny under its own policy.
“Consideration had not always been given to ensuring the proper external scrutiny in line with the provider's own policy.” from the report
Medicine patch records
needs fixingThere were no records showing where adhesive medicine patches had been placed. This created a risk that a new patch could be put in the same place and cause skin sensitivity.
“Records were not in place to indicate where each patch had been placed.” from the report
- 01What system is now used to make sure every incident or minor injury has a complete outcome and sign-off?
- 02When an incident occurs, how do you decide whether it needs external scrutiny or referral under your policy?
- 03How do you record and rotate the position of adhesive medicine patches?
- 04How would you record and follow my relative's wishes if they needed end of life care?
- 05How will my relative be supported to keep developing independence, activities and relationships?
This was a planned inspection covering the overall quality of the home and all five CQC questions; the overall rating remained Good from 3 February 2015. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 May 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 Futures
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 June 2014.
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.