CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Jemini Response 52 Summerheath Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including the use of PPE, cleaning, visitors, testing and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Jemini Response 52 Summerheath Road was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 1st March 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control because of the coronavirus outbreak response.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using personal protective equipment safely, following social distancing and shielding rules, and managing visitors, testing and possible outbreaks.
The home had regular cleaning, separate areas and carefully timed activities to reduce contact. Staff received infection control training and were kept updated about changing guidance.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other four questions.
Clean surroundings
The home had cleaning of high-touch areas every two hours and a weekly deep clean. Inspectors said the home was clean throughout.
“Staff worked exclusively at the service and were all involved in cleaning the home.” from the report
Safe use of PPE
Staff were trained in PPE and infection control. They also helped people understand why staff needed to wear face coverings.
“Staff spent time with people reassuring them about the need for staff having to wear personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Support for contact with relatives
The home followed visitor guidance and used letters, poems and video calls to help people keep in touch with relatives.
“The home used iPad's and helped some people to facetime and video call relatives.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff had training covering PPE, infection prevention and control, and coronavirus-specific requirements. They also received regular updates and welfare support.
“A robust training schedule was in place for all staff which included PPE, infection prevention and control and Covid-19 specific training.” from the report
Reduced contact between people
The home used separate eating areas, timed routines and dedicated activity spaces to support social distancing.
“People had two sittings at mealtimes and a separate room had been added where people could eat.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What are the home's current ratings for Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led?
- 02How are infection prevention and control arrangements kept up to date now?
- 03How often are high-touch areas and the whole home cleaned?
- 04How are relatives currently able to visit or keep in contact with people living at the home?
- 05What training and support do staff currently receive?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under Safe only; it did not rate the service overall or assess the other four questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 March 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, January 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some recent difficulties and further improvements planned to medicines checks.
The inspection took place on 5 and 6 December 2019. One inspector looked at the home, care records, medicines, staff recruitment, management records and how people were supported. People could not share their views directly because of their complex communication and support needs, so the inspector observed them and spoke with staff, relatives and professionals.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, safe medicines procedures, clean surroundings and staff trained to support people with autism and complex needs.
The home supported people to make choices, build independence, communicate in different ways and take part in activities and work placements. There had been an unsettled period when some people's needs increased, but inspectors said this crisis had passed and life was slowly returning to normal.
The overall rating stayed Good, the same as at the previous inspection published in January 2017. The report also noted that medicines audits were mainly stock checks and that some quality survey actions had not yet been formally written down.
Personalised support
Care was shaped around each person's communication, routines, choices and risks. Plans were reviewed when people's needs changed.
“People's care and support needs were assessed and reviewed regularly.” from the report
Building independence
People were supported to learn everyday skills and take part in meaningful activities, including work placements.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff understood people well and supported their privacy, dignity and individual preferences.
“People were treated well, and their individual needs were met.” from the report
Communication support
Staff used different methods, including Makaton, picture cards and social stories, to help people understand and make choices.
“Staff knew people well and how they communicated.” from the report
Recent unsettled period
needs fixingSome people's needs had increased and this had affected people and staff. Inspectors said the crisis period had passed, but families should ask what safeguards are now in place if needs increase again.
“There had been an unsettled period when some people's needs had increased, and this had an impact on people and staff.” from the report
Medicines audits
needs fixingMedicines audits were mainly stock checks. The home planned to broaden them and introduce more thorough checks of staff competency.
“Audits of medicines were carried out, but these mainly involved a stock check of all medicines.” from the report
Quality feedback records
minorManagers said they had acted on a very negative staff survey, but the actions had not yet been formally written down.
“The registered manager was able to tell us the actions taken as a result, but this had yet to be formally written.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made since the recent unsettled period, and what would happen if a person's needs increased again?
- 02Have the planned wider medicines audits and new staff competency checks now been completed?
- 03How will you support my relative's particular communication method, such as Makaton, picture cards or social stories?
- 04How will you help my relative build independence and take part in activities, community life or work placements?
- 05How do you record and act on feedback from relatives, staff and professionals?
This was a planned inspection of the care home covering all five CQC questions and both the premises and care provided; people could not give inspectors their views directly, and no provider information return was requested. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 January 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 Jemini Response 52 Summerheath Road
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Jemini Response 52 Summerheath Road →
- January 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Jemini Response 52 Summerheath Road →
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 October 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.