CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at The Whitebeach
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from harm, and individual risks such as falls, diabetes, dementia and swallowing difficulties were assessed. Staff numbers, recruitment, medicines and infection control were found to be safe.
- Effective?
- Good
- The home assessed people's needs before they moved in and reviewed care plans regularly. Staff training was up to date, and people received support with nutrition, hydration and health appointments.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported independence and involved people in everyday choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were person-centred and included people's histories, preferences and communication needs. People had activities, one-to-one support, complaint routes and recorded end-of-life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers were described as visible and approachable. Monthly audits, regular feedback and shared learning were used to monitor and improve the service.
What inspectors found, April 2023
The Whitebeach is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with all five areas rated Good.
Inspectors visited without warning on 22 and 23 March 2023. One inspector looked around the home, spoke with people, relatives, staff and a visiting professional, and checked care plans, medicines records, complaints and quality checks.
They found people were safe and cared for by enough trained staff. Medicines were handled safely, the home was clean, and staff understood people's risks. People received support with food, drink, appointments and communication.
Inspectors also found kind and respectful care. Care plans included people's histories, preferences and health needs. There were group and one-to-one activities, choices about daily routines, and support for end-of-life wishes.
The overall rating is Good, and each of the five areas is also Good. This was unchanged from the previous Good rating, published on 5 October 2018.
Enough trained staff
Inspectors found enough staff on each shift, with rotas showing staffing levels were slightly above the calculated minimum.
“People were supported by trained staff and there were enough staff on every shift to manage people's needs.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Staff were trained and checked for competence. Medicines records, storage, temperature checks and controlled drug procedures were found to be safe.
“Medicines were safely administered.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff took time to speak with people, protected their privacy and encouraged independence without compromising safety.
“People were treated with kindness and respect.” from the report
Personalised care plans
Care plans included personal histories, important relationships, preferences and current care needs. Staff used regular handovers and daily notes to share updates.
“Care plans were person-centred.” from the report
Activities and choice
People could join group activities, spend time one to one with staff or choose a quieter day. Birthdays and important dates were also celebrated.
“People had a daily choice and selection of activities to be involved with.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and review my relative's risks if they had falls, swallowing difficulties, diabetes or dementia?
- 02How would you support my relative to keep making choices about food, personal care and their daily routine?
- 03What activities and one-to-one support would be available if my relative preferred to spend time in their room?
- 04How would you keep our family informed about health appointments, changes in care needs or complaints?
- 05How would you record and respect my relative's end-of-life wishes?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe; the previous ratings were Good and remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 April 2023 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, April 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed and found improvements to the building and staff support.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 10 March 2022. Inspectors were responding to concerns about infection prevention and control. They also asked about staffing pressures and their effect on care.
The inspectors were assured that visitors, new admissions, people returning from trips, staff and residents were protected through testing, personal protective equipment, hygiene measures and social distancing. They also found that the infection control policy was up to date and visiting rules were being followed.
The home had acted on environmental checks by improving bathrooms and replacing worn, slippery flooring. Agency staff were used only at this home. Staff who needed extra help during the pandemic could receive counselling and other welfare support.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a normal overall rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Action on building risks
Environmental checks identified problems, and the home acted by converting bathrooms to wet rooms and replacing worn flooring on a slope.
“Environmental audits carried out in response to the pandemic highlighted areas for improvement which were then acted on.” from the report
Infection prevention
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements covering visitors, admissions, protective equipment, testing, hygiene and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Support for staff
The home provided extra welfare support, including counselling, for staff who needed it during the pandemic.
“Robust welfare support was offered to staff who needed additional support during the pandemic, this included counselling support.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and testing arrangements are in place now for visitors, staff and people returning from trips?
- 02How do you manage staffing pressures, and how often are agency staff used?
- 03Have the wet-room and flooring improvements been completed and kept in good condition?
- 04What support is available for staff who need help with their wellbeing?
- 05When was the service last given a full inspection and ratings for all five areas?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 April 2022 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 Whitebeach
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 August 2013.
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.