CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Paddocks
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, July 2019
The Paddocks was rated Good; inspectors found caring, safe and personalised support, with some parts of the building needing updating.
This was an unannounced inspection on 15 May 2019. Inspectors spoke with people and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines, staff files, incidents, complaints and management records. Some people could not communicate verbally, so observations were used to understand their experiences.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found detailed care plans, clear risk guidance, safe medicines systems and staff who understood people's needs and communication.
People were supported to make choices, stay as independent as possible and go out into the community. The main improvement point was that some areas of the building needed decoration or repair, so inspectors recommended an audit of the premises.
Personalised support
Care was shaped around people's individual needs, preferences, communication and goals. Staff knew people well and supported them to make choices.
“People received caring person-centred support by a staff team which prioritised their well-being.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were ordered, stored, given and recorded safely. Inspectors found especially good arrangements for as-required medicines.
“There was notably good practice in management of 'as required' (PRN) medicines.” from the report
Independence and community access
People were encouraged to take part in everyday tasks, choose activities and go out. Everyone living at the home had the opportunity to go out during the inspection.
“During our inspection, all of the five people living at the service were supported to go out.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed warm interactions and staff who respected people's privacy, dignity and choices.
“Throughout our visit we observed staff promoting people's independence wherever possible.” from the report
Management and learning
The manager used audits and records to monitor the service and acted on incidents. Staff felt supported and were able to discuss training needs.
“The registered manager had an effective governance system in place.” from the report
Parts of the building needed updating
needs fixingOne bedroom had no carpet and some areas needed decoration or repair. Inspectors recommended an audit of the premises to identify what needed updating.
“However, one person's bedroom did not have carpet and some areas of the service required decoration or repair.” from the report
- 01What has happened since the recommended audit of the premises, and which decoration or repairs have been completed?
- 02How would staff communicate with and understand my relative if they could not communicate verbally?
- 03How are as-required medicines and any alternative approaches recorded and reviewed?
- 04What activities and community outings would be available for my relative?
- 05How would staff support my relative to build independence in daily tasks such as cooking, cleaning or choosing activities?
This was an unannounced scheduled inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the previous Good rating from August 2016 remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 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.
What inspectors found, October 2016
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with a medicines-record problem that was addressed after the inspection.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 09 August 2016. One inspector and an expert by experience observed care, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, staff files and management records.
The home supported six younger adults with learning disabilities, autism and challenging behaviour. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness and supported to make choices, stay independent, eat well, access healthcare and take part in activities at home and in the community.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that some 'as and when needed' medicines were out of date or did not have clear expiry dates. The home took immediate action, contacted health professionals and introduced further checks.
Kind relationships
People said they were well cared for, and inspectors observed friendly, respectful and attentive support.
“People were supported with kindness and compassion.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans gave detailed guidance about people's routines, preferences, communication and how they wanted support.
“People had very detailed assessments and care plans, which contained good quality information about people's preferences, the support they needed and how they wanted this to be provided.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices about their day and to carry out tasks for themselves where they could.
“People were empowered to make their own decisions and were free to do very much what they wanted throughout the day.” from the report
Activities and community life
People took part in a wide range of activities, including trampolining, bowling, horse riding, shopping and community events.
“There was evidence that people engaged in activities, in the service and out in the community.” from the report
Open management
Staff felt able to raise concerns and make suggestions. Audits and incident reviews were used to support improvement.
“There was an open and inclusive culture that encouraged people and staff to work in collaboration with each other and to give their views.” from the report
Medicines expiry checks
seriousInspectors found some medicines prescribed for use when needed were out of date. Other medicines did not show an expiry date, so inspectors could not confirm they were safe to use.
“Some medicines which had been prescribed to be given on an 'as and when needed' basis were out of date and had not been removed from the medicine cabinet.” from the report
- 01How are medicines given only when needed checked for expiry dates now?
- 02What records will show that medicines are stored, administered and audited safely?
- 03How will you support my relative's preferred way of communicating, including signs, symbols or pictures?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available to my relative?
- 05How are positive behaviour support plans reviewed when a person's needs or behaviour changes?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC questions and including observations, discussions and checks of care, staff and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 October 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 The Paddocks
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West 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 £1,020 to £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.