CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Marshes
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed. This included visitor screening, PPE, testing, cleaning, social distancing and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 08 April 2021. Inspectors checked how the home prevented and controlled infection during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that visitors were screened, PPE was used safely, testing was available and cleaning was carried out regularly. The home had recovered from an outbreak and had plans for managing further cases.
Staff had infection control training and received regular support. People were supported to keep in touch with relatives and to take part in activities, walks and local drives.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most areas of care.
Visitor infection checks
Visitors had to arrange visits in advance, complete a risk assessment, have their temperature taken and take a lateral flow test before entering.
“On arrival at the service all visitors would have their temperature taken and be asked to carry out a Lateral Flow Device (LFD) COVID -19 test before they could enter the home.” from the report
Cleaning and hygiene
Cleaning records were clear, and touch points were cleaned three times a day. Inspectors were assured that the premises were being kept hygienic.
“Cleaning schedules were clearly recorded. All touch points were cleaned three times daily.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The home had recovered from an outbreak and had plans for dealing with future exposure or positive COVID-19 tests.
“The home had recovered from an outbreak and had contingency plans in place should any person or staff come into contact with anyone with COVID -19 or test positive.” from the report
Support for people and staff
People were supported to keep in touch with relatives and take part in activities. Staff received regular supervision and support.
“Where possible, people continued to be supported to maintain contact with relatives by telephone and through the use of technology.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Are visitors still asked to arrange visits in advance and complete the infection checks described in the report?
- 02What is the current plan if a resident or staff member is exposed to COVID-19 or tests positive?
- 03How are individual risk assessments kept up to date for health conditions, mobility and communication needs?
- 04How will my relative be supported to keep in touch with family and take part in activities?
- 05What infection control training and PPE arrangements do staff currently have?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 May 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, July 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but the home needed to improve its leadership and records.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 29 and 30 May 2019. One inspector observed care, spoke with staff and visiting professionals, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, training and management records. People could not tell inspectors directly about their experiences, so observations were important.
The inspector found enough trained staff, safe medicines practices, suitable risk assessments and a clean, well-maintained environment. People were supported to make choices, stay as independent as possible, attend health appointments and take part in activities suited to their interests. Staff were described as caring and respectful, and they knew people well.
The home was rated Good overall and Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Well-led was rated Requires Improvement because some daily activity records were inaccurate, monthly quality reports had not been completed for two months during the manager's absence, and a staff survey had not been dated or analysed.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make everyday choices and to build independence in ways suited to them.
“People were supported to make choices in all areas of daily living from choosing clothes to wear to what they wanted to do.” from the report
Safe staffing
The home had enough staff on each shift, with recruitment checks completed before staff started work.
“There were good recruitment procedures and enough staff on each shift to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind, personalised care
Staff knew people's preferences, histories and communication styles, and used this knowledge to provide respectful care.
“Staff were passionate about the care they provided and demonstrated a caring and respectful approach with people.” from the report
Activities and community life
People took part in varied activities, entertainment and trips that reflected their wishes and interests.
“People were supported to take part in activities to meet their individual needs and wishes.” from the report
Inaccurate activity records
needs fixingSome daily records did not match what people had actually done. This meant weekly summaries could also be inaccurate, and records did not always show what people gained from activities.
“We found these were not always accurate. For one person, the pre-planned activity the day before our inspection was to walk to the shops for personal shopping.” from the report
Missed quality monitoring
needs fixingMonthly quality reports had not been completed for the two months before the inspection while the registered manager was away.
“As the registered manager had been on extended leave and the regional manager was visiting the service more regularly these reports had not been done over the past two months.” from the report
Staff survey not reviewed
minorThe most recent staff survey was not dated and its results had not been analysed, limiting the evidence about staff views and any action needed.
“The most recent staff survey was not dated, and the results had not been analysed.” from the report
Conflicting emergency medicine instructions
needs fixingTwo documents gave different timings for calling an ambulance after emergency seizure medicine. Inspectors assessed the impact as low because the medicine had not been needed that year.
“The advice in one person's care plan for giving emergency medicine in the event of a seizure conflicted with the advice in their guidelines.” from the report
Follow-up of recommendations
minorA visiting professional reported some delays in following up recommendations, although the report says these issues had been resolved.
“We had some issues with timely follow up of recommendations, but these were resolved.” from the report
- 01How have you made sure daily activity records accurately describe what each person did and enjoyed?
- 02What quality monitoring checks are now completed each month, including when the registered manager is away?
- 03How are staff survey results now dated, analysed and used to improve the home?
- 04How have you corrected the conflicting instructions about emergency seizure medicine?
- 05How do you make sure recommendations from health professionals are followed up promptly?
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection covering the premises and care provided, with the five standard questions rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 July 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 The Marshes
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 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.