CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at The Adelaide Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks, safeguarding concerns, staffing, recruitment, medicines and infection control were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, and people received help with nutrition, healthcare and communication. Inspectors found that consent and best-interest decisions were handled appropriately.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and respectful. People were supported to make choices, maintain their dignity and keep as much independence as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and included people's interests, choices and communication needs. The home supported activities, relationships, complaints and end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open culture, approachable leadership and regular quality checks. Feedback was collected and used to make improvements.
What inspectors found, September 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with strong management and no significant shortfalls identified.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 19 August 2021. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and checked care records, medicines records, recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines processes, suitable training and good support with food, healthcare and communication.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Care plans included people's choices and preferences. The home also supported activities, family contact and end of life care.
The previous inspection rating was also Good. This inspection was part of a random check of services rated Good or Outstanding, and included a specific check of infection prevention and control measures during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported their dignity, privacy, choices and independence.
“We saw kind and caring interactions between staff and people.” from the report
Personalised care plans
Care plans recorded people's needs, backgrounds, interests, likes and dislikes. Staff used this information to provide care in the person's preferred way.
“Care plans were person centred and detailed people's needs and wishes.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were administered, stored and disposed of safely. Records were checked and staff had regular competency assessments.
“Medicine administration records (MARs) were completed accurately.” from the report
Strong quality checks
The home used audits, staff meetings and feedback to identify problems, share learning and improve care.
“Robust quality assurance audits were carried out to identify any shortfalls within the service and these were used to drive improvement.” from the report
Support for relationships and interests
People were supported to take part in activities, maintain family contact and follow their interests, including during the pandemic.
“People were supported to maintain relationships that were important to them.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and review my relative's specific nursing and health needs before admission?
- 02How would you support my relative's communication needs and personal choices if they found it difficult to speak?
- 03What staffing levels would be in place for my relative's needs, and how consistent would the staff team be?
- 04How would you support my relative to keep in touch with family and take part in activities they enjoy?
- 05How would you record and honour my relative's wishes about end of life care?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, with additional checks of infection prevention and control measures; all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 September 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, February 2018
The Adelaide Nursing Home is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a recommendation about accessible information.
The inspection was comprehensive and unannounced. It took place on 18 January 2018 because CQC had received information of concern. One inspector observed care, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, staff files, training records and quality checks.
The report found that people felt safe and well cared for. Medicines, staffing, recruitment, infection control and environmental risks were managed appropriately. Staff were trained, people were supported with food, drink and healthcare, and their choices, privacy and independence were respected.
People had personalised care plans and access to activities, visitors and end of life care planning. The home was described as open and well managed, with systems to check quality and gather feedback. All five areas were rated Good.
Safe medicines
Inspectors found that medicines were stored, given, checked and reviewed safely. Records they examined were accurate.
“Medicines were managed safely and in accordance with current regulations and guidance.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People described caring relationships with staff. Inspectors observed friendly communication, respect for privacy and support for people's choices.
“People were supported by kind and caring staff.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's likes, dislikes, routines and communication needs. Staff were said to know people well and support them as individuals.
“Care plans accurately recorded people's likes, dislikes and preferences.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could choose from activities and received one-to-one time if they stayed in their rooms. Visitors were welcomed and people were supported to maintain relationships.
“The service ensured that people who remained in their rooms and may be at risk of social isolation were included in activities and received social interaction.” from the report
Open management
Staff said managers were available to discuss problems and suggestions. The home used audits, meetings and surveys to monitor its work.
“The provider undertook quality assurance audits to ensure a good level of quality was maintained.” from the report
Accessible information systems
minorStaff met people's communication needs in practice, but day-to-day staff did not know about the Accessible Information Standard. The provider had not put related policies, procedures or training in place, and CQC made a recommendation.
“However, none of the day to day staff at the service were aware of the AIS and no policy, procedures or training around this had been implemented.” from the report
- 01What policies and staff training have now been put in place about accessible information and communication needs?
- 02How will you support my relative if they have hearing, language, dementia or other communication difficulties?
- 03How are care plans reviewed, and how will our family be involved in those reviews?
- 04How do you maintain staffing levels when staff are off sick or on annual leave, and when do you use agency staff?
- 05What activities and one-to-one support would be available if my relative preferred to spend time in their room?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, based on observations, discussions and checks of a sample of records and staff files. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 February 2018 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 The Adelaide Nursing Home
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 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
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.