CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Lebrun House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks were assessed, staffing was sufficient, recruitment checks were completed, and medicines and infection control were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care plans gave staff clear guidance. Staff had relevant training, and people were supported with nutrition, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, calm and respectful. People were involved in decisions, supported to remain independent, and treated with dignity and privacy.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences and communication needs. The home provided activities, supported relationships and used complaints to make improvements.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The manager was open and had an improvement plan, but person-centred activities and mealtime choices were not fully embedded. Some body maps and medicine temperature records also needed improvement.
What inspectors found, July 2022
Lebrun House was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care, but leadership and some records required improvement.
This was the first inspection of the newly registered service. Inspectors visited without warning on 16 and 20 June 2022. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicine records and quality documents.
Inspectors found people were protected from harm, had enough staff and received medicines safely. Staff assessed risks, supported people with food and drink, worked with health professionals, and provided kind and respectful care. Care plans were personalised and activities, complaints and end of life wishes were considered.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive were all rated Good. Well-led was rated Requires Improvement because person-centred activities and mealtime choices were not yet fully developed, and some records were incomplete. The registered manager acted on the issues during the inspection.
Risk management
Risks were regularly reviewed, with practical measures used to reduce harm. Staff understood people's health risks and how to respond.
“Risks to people had been regularly assessed and reviewed and control measures put into place to reduce the risk of harm to people.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff speaking kindly, listening to people and helping them feel comfortable. People were supported with dignity and encouraged to be independent.
“People were supported by staff who were kind and caring. Staff spoke to people in a calm and friendly way.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans were created with people and their families where appropriate. Staff learned about people's wishes, interests and preferred ways of communicating.
“People's care plans were person centred and had been created in partnership with the person and their family where appropriate.” from the report
Relevant staff training
Staff had induction, shadow shifts and training relevant to the people they supported, including dementia, diabetes and epilepsy.
“Staff received training in areas that were relevant to people they supported.” from the report
Incomplete skin records
needs fixingOne person's bruising had not been regularly recorded on body maps or in the care plan. The manager put weekly body mapping in place during the inspection.
“Bruising for this person had not been regularly recorded on body maps or in the person's care plan.” from the report
Activities and mealtime choices
minorActivities for people who did not enjoy groups were limited. At one lunchtime, people were not offered choices about accompaniments or meal size, and the choices were not shown visually.
“Some people told us they wanted more opportunities for engagement and more activities to get involved in.” from the report
- 01What one-to-one activities are now available for people who do not enjoy group activities?
- 02How are residents now offered choices about meal accompaniments and meal size?
- 03How do you check that body maps and skin records are completed and reviewed when needed?
- 04How are daily medicine room and medicine fridge temperatures recorded and checked?
- 05How do residents and families give feedback, and what recent changes have followed from it?
This was an unannounced first inspection of the newly registered care home and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 July 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, November 2020
Lebrun House was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control measures were being followed.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 6 November 2020. It checked infection prevention and control because of the coronavirus outbreak response. The home was not given an overall rating.
Inspectors found that the home was following guidance on PPE, social distancing, cleaning, testing and visitors. Staff had access to PPE, and supplies were adequate. The home was not taking new admissions at the time.
Testing was carried out in a relaxed and unhurried way to support people who might feel anxious. The manager carried out infection control checks and acted on issues found, including arranging refresher training.
The service was rated 'Inspected but not rated' for safety. Inspectors said they were assured about infection prevention and control, but this inspection did not assess the other areas of care.
PPE and cleaning
Staff used PPE correctly, with supplies available throughout the home. Cleaning included people's rooms, communal areas and frequently touched surfaces.
“Staff used PPE appropriately. PPE was located in people's rooms if appropriate and there were PPE 'stations' on each floor of the building” from the report
Testing support
People and staff were tested regularly. Staff carried out testing calmly and without rushing, recognising that it could cause anxiety.
“The process of testing was done in a relaxed, unhurried manner to ensure people felt comfortable and supported.” from the report
Checks and training
The manager carried out infection control checks and acted on the results, including arranging refresher training for staff.
“The registered manager carried out checks and audits in relation to infection prevention and control and implemented any actions identified.” from the report
Visitor and distancing arrangements
The home followed guidance for visitors, shielding and social distancing. Temperatures were checked for staff and essential health professionals entering the home.
“We were assured that the provider was preventing visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its infection control approach. The report does not say that this resulted in a breach or enforcement action.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now, including PPE supplies, cleaning and social distancing?
- 02How are people supported if Covid-19 testing makes them anxious?
- 03How often are staff and residents tested now, and how are the results managed?
- 04What changes were made after the infection prevention and control checks and refresher training mentioned in the report?
- 05Is the home currently accepting new admissions, and what infection control checks are completed before admission?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas of care were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 November 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 Lebrun House
7 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- July 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- May 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 February 2020.
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.