CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Marine View Rest Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that medicines, risk assessments, staffing, safeguarding and incident follow-up were managed safely. Infection prevention arrangements during COVID-19 were also considered appropriate.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not looked at during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not looked at during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not looked at during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Quality checks and notifications to the CQC had improved. Inspectors found positive leadership, detailed records and a caring, inclusive culture.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Marine View Rest Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe care and improved leadership after a focused inspection.
Inspectors visited on 10 and 11 November 2020 after concerns about risk assessments and quality checks. They reviewed care, medicine and incident records, spoke with staff, a person and a relative, and observed the home briefly.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found medicines were recorded correctly, staff understood people's risks, staffing was suitable, and infection control arrangements during COVID-19 were appropriate. They found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from the concerns that led to the inspection.
Leadership had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection in May 2019. The overall rating remained Good, but this visit did not reassess Caring, Effective or Responsive. Those ratings carried over from the earlier comprehensive inspection.
Safe medicines
The medicine records inspectors checked were accurate. Medicines were stored securely, checked and disposed of safely.
“The MARs we saw were completed accurately and correctly.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable COVID-19 infection control arrangements, including cleaning, PPE, testing and social distancing.
“We were assured the provider managed infection prevention and control through the COVID-19 pandemic.” from the report
Improved management
The well-led rating improved from Requires Improvement in May 2019 to Good. The home had introduced audits and acted on shortfalls.
“At this inspection, this key question has now improved to Good.” from the report
Kind staff
People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the care and the atmosphere. Inspectors observed a relaxed relationship between people and staff.
“The culture of the service was positive and inclusive.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you now assess and update each person's risks, including falls, mobility, health conditions and behaviours that may challenge?
- 02What do your current audits show about medicines, care plans, staff training and infection control, and how are any shortfalls acted on?
- 03How do you make sure accidents and incidents are reviewed for patterns and that follow-up actions are completed?
- 04How do you assess staffing levels when people's needs change or staff are absent?
- 05How are families told about changes in a relative's health or wellbeing, and how are required notifications sent to the CQC?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led following concerns; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 December 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.
What inspectors found, May 2019
Rated Good overall, with safe, effective, caring and responsive care, but leadership and oversight required improvement.
Inspectors made an unannounced, comprehensive visit on 17 April 2019. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and the provider. They also checked care records, medicines, staff files, training, complaints, incidents and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in four areas: Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated kindly, supported to make choices, given personalised care and helped to access food, healthcare, activities and the local community.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. The provider had not always understood when changes to the service and its registration needed to be reported to the CQC. The provider was working with a consultant and senior staff on an action plan to improve quality checks.
The overall rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection, published in May 2018. Earlier concerns about risk management, staff training, personalised care, medicines and quality checks had been addressed and the report says the legal requirements were being met.
Kind relationships
People and relatives described staff as warm, polite and considerate. Inspectors also saw comfortable and respectful interactions.
“Throughout the inspection, people and staff engaged in warm comfortable interactions” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, preferences, communication needs and changing health or emotional needs. Staff knew people well and used this information to provide individual support.
“Care plans were person centred, detailing life histories including people's achievements both personal and in their working life.” from the report
Improved safety
The home had improved how it recorded and reviewed accidents and incidents. It used learning from events to update care plans and risk assessments.
“At this inspection accidents and incidents were recorded and action taken to prevent a reoccurrence.” from the report
Support for choice and independence
People were supported to make decisions, go out into the community and remain as independent as possible, including where a person had a DoLS authorisation.
“The person was very active and enjoyed visiting the local community independently” from the report
Food and healthcare
People received help to maintain their health and had access to relevant professionals. Food choices and special diets were considered.
“People were supported by staff to maintain good health and had access to GPs, specialist diabetes nurses, opticians and community mental health teams when needed.” from the report
Reporting and registration duties
needs fixingThe provider had not reported changes to the service's statement of purpose and organisation status within the required timeframe. This was the main reason leadership was rated Requires Improvement.
“The registered provider did not always understand their responsibilities in relation to registration and notifying the Care Quality Commission (CQC) of changes to their statement of purpose.” from the report
Quality improvement still developing
minorThe provider was still working through an action plan to make quality checks more reliable and to ensure records stayed accurate and sufficiently detailed.
“The provider was working to an action plan designed with a management consultant” from the report
Recruitment record gap
minorEvidence of an employment history check was missing from one staff file during the inspection. The provider obtained a replacement reference.
“The provider was not able to provide copies of the evidence they had seen in relation to the employment history of one staff member.” from the report
- 01What actions are being taken to improve the Well-led rating, and who checks that the action plan is completed?
- 02How do you make sure changes to the service, its registration or statement of purpose are reported to the CQC on time?
- 03How are accidents, falls and changes in people's needs reviewed, and how quickly are care plans updated?
- 04What specialist training do staff have for dementia, degenerative conditions and mental health needs?
- 05How do you check that medicines records and self-administration arrangements remain safe and up to date?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and following up improvements required after the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 May 2019 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 Marine View Rest Home
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 November 2010.
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
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Brighton and Hove
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 £1,020 to £1,280 a week. 37 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Lottie showed incredible patience and empathy, adapting her routine to fit in with Mum's moods. Most importantly, Lottie's cheerful manner helped Mum to get some enjoyment out of life.”
“He was infinitely patient with them and got on very well with us to the extent that we now regard him as a personal friend.”
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.