CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Marshview
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks were understood, staffing was sufficient and medicines were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received healthcare support, staff had training and supervision, and meals met people's needs and preferences. Inspectors also noted some care information was incomplete.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and compassionate. People were involved in everyday choices and supported to keep their privacy, dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was generally person-centred and staff knew people well. People could take part in activities, keep in touch with family and raise complaints.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Management had a positive and open culture, but care plans, recruitment records and quality audits were not consistently complete or effective.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Marshview was rated Good overall, but inspectors found record keeping and quality checks needed improvement.
This was a planned inspection on 10 and 12 December 2019. Two inspectors spoke with people, a visitor and staff. They observed care, reviewed records and watched support at mealtimes.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, kind care, suitable health support, good food and activities that people enjoyed.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. Some care plans and other records did not contain enough information, and the home's audits had not found these problems. The provider had started work to address them, and CQC recommended seeking advice about good record keeping.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to support people safely and saw that medicines were ordered, stored and given properly.
“There were enough staff working to provide the support people needed, at times of their choice.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People had trusting relationships with staff. Staff offered choices, respected privacy and encouraged people to remain independent.
“Staff were very kind and compassionate towards the people they supported.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to join activities they enjoyed, including individual and small-group activities. Friends and family were welcome to visit.
“People were supported to take part in activities that they enjoyed.” from the report
Food and health support
People received freshly cooked food, drinks and snacks that reflected their needs and choices. Staff worked with healthcare professionals when concerns arose.
“People were provided with a wide choice of healthy, freshly cooked meals, drinks and snacks each day.” from the report
Incomplete care records
needs fixingSome care plans did not contain enough information about risks, diabetes support, mental capacity, eating support or activities. Inspectors said staff knew people well, but this knowledge was not always recorded.
“Care plans did not include all the necessary information.” from the report
Quality checks missed problems
needs fixingThe home's care plan audits confirmed that reviews had taken place but did not check whether the content matched people's needs. Other records also had gaps.
“The audit system had not identified the shortfalls we found in relation to people's records.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to care plan audits since the inspection?
- 02How do you now record and review support for people with diabetes, including blood sugar ranges and actions for high or low readings?
- 03How are pressure damage risks and skin checks recorded and reviewed?
- 04How do you record people's mental capacity, eating support, interests and individual activities?
- 05What checks now make sure recruitment records and other management records are complete?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home environment; the previous overall rating was Good, published on 21 February 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 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.
What inspectors found, February 2017
Marshview was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with minor record-keeping and meal-choice issues addressed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 5 January 2017. One inspector spoke with people living in the home, relatives, the manager and staff. They observed care, looked around the building and checked care, medicine, staffing and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems, suitable training and care plans that reflected people's needs and preferences.
People and relatives said staff were kind and knew them well. People were supported with food, drink, healthcare, activities, privacy and independence. Complaints were recorded as being handled appropriately and promptly.
The home had systems to check quality and make improvements. An audit had found some documentation shortfalls, and meal-choice feedback had been mixed, but the report says actions had been completed or addressed.
Safe medicines
Medicine records were complete and up to date. The home had clear arrangements for storage, administration and as-needed medicines.
“Medicines were managed safely. Processes were in place which ensured that people received their medicines on time and 'as required.'” from the report
Kind, respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff using a gentle manner and respecting privacy and dignity.
“People told us that staff always treated them with kindness and respect.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's health, personal, social and spiritual needs. Staff knew people's histories, preferences and how they wanted to be supported.
“Care plans reflected people's individual needs, choices and preferences and provided clear guidance to staff on how to make sure personalised care was provided.” from the report
Independence and choice
People were encouraged to make decisions and remain as independent as possible. This included choices about activities, meals and some aspects of their care.
“The registered provider demonstrated a clear process for the management of risk, without restricting or limiting people's independence.” from the report
Responsive management
People and relatives could raise concerns, and complaints were recorded as dealt with appropriately and promptly.
“Records showed that eight complaints had been received by the service in the last 12 months which had been responded to appropriately and in a timely manner.” from the report
Meal choices
minorFeedback about meal choices was mixed. The home responded through residents' meetings and changed meal times to reflect people's wishes.
“Feedback regarding meal choices had been variable and this has been immediately addressed through the 'residents' meetings.” from the report
Record keeping
minorAn audit found some shortfalls in documentation. The report says actions were completed and recorded.
“An example was the audit of people's care plans which had identified some shortfalls in the recording of documentation.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure there are enough staff on duty for people's current needs?
- 02How are medicine records and weekly medicine audits checked now?
- 03What steps do you take to keep care plans and daily records complete and up to date?
- 04How do you record and act on people's current food preferences and feedback?
- 05How are people supported to remain independent and take part in activities they choose?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall quality of the home, covering all five CQC questions and reviewing care, medicine, staffing, safety and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 February 2017 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 Marshview
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 January 2011.
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.