CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Hastings Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and appropriate infection control. People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found consistent management, positive staff leadership and governance systems that were being used to improve the service.
What inspectors found, June 2022
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe care and good leadership, with some medicine audit and fluid-record issues to improve.
This was an unannounced inspection over three days. Inspectors spoke with 15 people, three relatives, two health professionals and staff. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicine records, staff records, rotas and management documents.
The inspection was prompted partly by concerns about staffing and the delivery of care. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and appropriate infection control. People said they felt safe and that staff responded to their needs.
The home’s governance systems were being used to improve care. Inspectors noted some medicine errors that were not fully analysed in the monthly audit, and some inconsistent fluid records while a new care documentation system was being introduced.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used when calculating the overall rating.
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were based on people’s needs and reviewed daily. A hospitality worker on each unit helped care staff focus on care and support.
“There were enough staff to support people safely.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, given and disposed of safely. Staff who administered them had suitable training and competency checks.
“We observed staff administering medicines safely to people ensuring that they were offered the medicines, given time to take them in the way that they preferred and signed for once they were taken.” from the report
Good risk planning
People had individual risk assessments and care plans. Staff followed guidance for modified diets and other health risks.
“Each person had individual risk assessments with associated care plans.” from the report
Positive leadership
People, relatives and staff were positive about the management team. The home used audits, meetings and feedback to identify improvements.
“The management team discussed regulations during staff meetings to ensure that staff knew what was expected of them and how the regulations relate to their practice.” from the report
Medicine errors were not fully analysed
needs fixingSome medicine errors had been recorded as incidents, but the monthly medicine audit did not reflect them. The causes and actions to prevent repeat errors had not been fully recorded.
“There had been some medicine errors, which were not reflected in the monthly medicine audit.” from the report
Inconsistent fluid records
needs fixingInspectors found some inconsistencies in fluid monitoring because of the way staff recorded information on the new care documentation system. The home was addressing this.
“There were some inconsistencies in fluid monitoring due to the way staff recorded fluids on the system.” from the report
- 01What medicine errors have happened since this inspection, and how are their causes and prevention steps recorded?
- 02How do you check that fluid monitoring records are complete and accurate on the new documentation system?
- 03How do you decide whether staffing levels are enough for the needs of people living in each unit?
- 04What are the current ratings and most recent inspection findings for Effective, Caring and Responsive?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were used in calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 June 2022 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 2022
Hastings Court: inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control, testing and visiting arrangements.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 8 February 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19-related staffing pressures were affecting care.
The inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, carried out testing, kept the building clean and supported safe visits. They also found that the home had plans for isolating people in small zones during an outbreak.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report gives evidence about the areas checked, but it is not a full assessment of the home's overall quality.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had effective arrangements to prevent and manage infections, including safe use of PPE and up-to-date guidance.
“We were assured that the provider's infection prevention and control policy was up to date.” from the report
Safe visiting
The home supported visits in different ways, including face-to-face visits, visits through a partition, garden access and phone or video calls.
“People were supported by staff to have visits from their friends and family in various ways throughout the pandemic.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was described as clean and hygienic. Cleaning schedules included frequent cleaning of areas such as keypads and lifts.
“The home was clean and hygienic. The head house keeper explained that they completed daily cleaning schedules which included hourly contact areas, such as key pads and lifts.” from the report
Testing
Regular COVID-19 testing was taking place for people living in the home and staff.
“Regular testing for people and staff was taking place.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What measures are currently in place if there are COVID-19-related staffing pressures?
- 02How are visits managed now, including checks, named visitors and risk assessments?
- 03How often are high-contact areas cleaned, and how are cleaning checks recorded?
- 04How would the home safely isolate people during an infection outbreak?
- 05What testing and infection-control arrangements are currently in place for staff and residents?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other four questions or the service overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 March 2022 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 Hastings Court
5 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvement
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- December 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 December 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.