CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 50a Avis Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staffing, recruitment, medicines, infection control and risk management were generally safe, although some feeding tube actions were not consistently recorded.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and worked with health professionals. People received support with eating, drinking, health appointments and decision-making, although constipation care plans were not consistently in place.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in everyday choices and care planning, and staff supported independence and individual communication.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised around people's needs, interests, relationships and communication methods. Specific end of life care plans were not yet in place, although the provider was taking action.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open, empowering culture and a stable staff team. Audits, incident reviews, feedback and learning were used to monitor quality and improve care.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some care records needing improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 1 and 5 August 2019. One inspector observed care, spoke with staff and the manager, reviewed care, medicine, recruitment and management records, and contacted five relatives afterwards.
The home supported six adults with complex physical and learning disabilities. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines systems, detailed risk plans and caring relationships. People were supported to make choices, stay independent, keep in touch with relatives and take part in activities.
Inspectors found some gaps in records. Actions involving feeding tubes were not always recorded, constipation care plans were not consistently in place, and specific end of life plans were still being developed. All five areas were rated Good, the same as at the previous inspection in 2016.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to provide personalised care and support people to go out and take part in activities. Recruitment checks were also completed safely.
“Observations demonstrated that staffing levels were sufficient, and people received personalised care.” from the report
Kind relationships
Staff knew people well and treated them with warmth, humour, dignity and respect. Relatives also confirmed that people were treated respectfully.
“Throughout the inspection, we observed caring interactions which demonstrated that people were at the forefront of the service.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's preferences, abilities, communication and goals. Staff supported people to make choices, develop independence and take part in meaningful activities.
“People living at 50a Avis Road received personalised, one to one support so they could receive a service based on their individual lifestyle preferences.” from the report
Strong management
The management team used audits, feedback and reviews of incidents to identify learning and improve the service. Staff felt listened to and supported.
“A quality assurance system was in place which was underpinned by a range of audits to help drive improvement.” from the report
Feeding tube records
needs fixingStaff understood how to care for people's feeding tubes, but records did not consistently show that required actions had been completed. The manager identified that the paperwork needed improvement.
“However, care documentation failed to consistently record these actions.” from the report
Constipation care plans
needs fixingStaff monitored bowel movements and knew some warning signs, but individual care plans did not consistently explain people's usual bowel habits, risks and prevention measures.
“However, constipation care plans were not consistently in place.” from the report
End of life planning
minorNo one needed end of life care during the inspection. However, individual plans recording people's wishes and preferences were not yet in place, and the provider was working on this.
“However, specific end of life care plans were not in place which considered people's wishes and preferences.” from the report
- 01How are feeding tube care actions recorded now, and how do managers check these records are complete?
- 02What does each person's current constipation care plan say about their usual bowel habits, risks and warning signs?
- 03Have individual end of life care plans now been completed, including each person's wishes and preferences?
- 04How are restrictive practices reviewed to make sure they remain necessary, proportionate and the least restrictive option?
- 05How will you support my relative's communication, independence, activities and contact with family?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, the premises and the care provided; all ratings remained Good from the previous inspection in 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 August 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.
What inspectors found, November 2016
Southdown Housing Association - 50a Avis Road was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with some concern about outings and staff supervision.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 12 October 2016. One inspector observed care, spoke with four people, staff and relatives, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
The home supported four people with complex learning and physical disabilities, although it could support up to five. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training, detailed care plans and good access to health professionals.
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported people to make choices, take part in activities and spend time in the home or local community. Inspectors found the home clean, calm and personalised.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection in May 2014 had raised no concerns.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to support people without rushing them. Staff said they had enough staff on duty to keep people safe.
“People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to meet their needs in a relaxed and unhurried manner.” from the report
Skilled support
Staff received broad training and knew people's complex health and communication needs. New staff shadowed experienced staff until their ability had been checked.
“People received effective care and support from staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs.” from the report
Kind and personal care
People were treated with compassion, dignity and respect. Staff used different ways to help people communicate and make choices.
“It was clear from how people interacted with staff they were happy and confident in their company.” from the report
Activities and choice
People were supported to join activities such as swimming, discos, theatres, cooking and community trips. The home had two vehicles to help people travel further.
“People were able to take part in activities both at the home and in the local community.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider used audits, meetings and feedback to identify problems and make changes. Accidents and incidents were recorded and reviewed.
“There were effective quality assurance systems in place to monitor care and plan on going improvements.” from the report
Fewer outings
minorOne relative felt their family member was not going out as often as in the past. The manager said staffing was risk assessed and shorter trips were still provided.
“One relative felt sometimes their relative was unable to go out as much as they had in the past” from the report
Staff supervision
needs fixingA quality audit found a shortfall in staff supervision. The manager said supervision had been increased to address this.
“a red area had been identified against staff supervision.” from the report
- 01How often will my relative go out, and what happens if staffing levels mean a planned activity cannot take place?
- 02What changes were made to staff supervision after the shortfall identified in the July to September 2016 audit?
- 03How will staff learn and record my relative's non-verbal signs of pain, illness or distress?
- 04What is the current status of any deprivation of liberty safeguards application for my relative?
- 05How will my relative's specialist nutritional needs, including any PEG support if relevant, be managed and reviewed?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five questions and the overall quality of the home; four people were living there at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 November 2016 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 50a Avis Road
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 December 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
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.