CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Touchstones
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding procedures, risks were reviewed, recruitment checks were completed and there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were fully assessed and regularly reviewed. Staff were trained and supported, people had choices about food and activities, and they were helped to access health services.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions about their care and were supported to live in the way they chose.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personal, included people's histories and choices, and were updated when needs changed. People could choose whether to join activities and were supported to maintain important relationships.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found positive management and leadership, regular quality checks and an annual development plan. People, relatives and staff were asked for feedback.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Touchstones was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 19 November 2019. Two inspectors spoke with four people living at the home, two relatives and five staff. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff recruitment and training files, and management records.
The inspectors found that people were safe and supported by kind staff who knew them well. Care plans were regularly reviewed, medicines were managed safely, and people were supported to make choices, stay independent and use health and social care services.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same as the previous rating, published on 28 April 2017.
Kind and knowledgeable staff
Staff knew people well and supported them in a calm, respectful way. Inspectors saw people who appeared comfortable and relaxed around staff.
“People were being supported by kind and caring staff who knew their needs well.” from the report
Supporting independence
People were encouraged to make decisions, maintain their skills and take positive risks. Inspectors described support that helped people live the lifestyle they chose.
“People were supported with positive risk taking to maintain their independence.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's histories, preferences and choices. People were involved in planning and reviewing their care with their keyworker.
“People had full involvement in the assessment of their care needs, planning, creation and review of their care plan.” from the report
Strong partnerships
The home worked with health and social care professionals, including mental health services, occupational therapy, GPs and dentists.
“Strong partnerships had been made with local community services and health practitioners.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you support my relative to make their own choices and maintain their independence?
- 02How do you assess whether someone can manage their own medicines, and what checks are made if they do?
- 03How often would my relative's care plan be reviewed, and how would they and their family be involved?
- 04What staff would usually support my relative, and how do you maintain continuity when staff are absent?
- 05What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative, and would they be able to choose not to take part?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led; all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 January 2020 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 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but noted some medicines and CCTV consent records needed attention.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 13 March 2017. One inspector and an expert by experience observed care, spoke with people and staff, and checked care records, medicines records, staffing information and management records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were supported by trained staff who knew their needs. Inspectors found that people felt safe, were treated with kindness and respect, and were involved in their care.
The home had improved since the February 2016 inspection. Problems with risk assessments and the premises had been addressed, and mental health training had been introduced. Inspectors noted some minor issues, including incorrect symbols on some medicines records and missing written consent for CCTV.
Risk management
The home had detailed risk assessments covering people's health, behaviour, medicines, trips and safety around the building. Staff had clear guidance on how to reduce risks.
“Risk assessments provided detailed information and guidance to staff on how to support people safely and mitigate any risks.” from the report
Kind staff
People described staff as caring, friendly and respectful. Inspectors observed warm and supportive conversations.
“People were supported by kind, caring and friendly staff.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs, histories, preferences and goals. Keyworkers met people regularly and supported independence.
“Care plans contained detailed information about people's care and support needs.” from the report
Improvement since the last inspection
The provider had addressed earlier problems with risk assessments and the premises. Mental health training had also been added for staff.
“As a result of steps that the provider had taken, the overall rating of this service has improved from Requires Improvement to Good.” from the report
Management oversight
The home used audits covering areas such as medicines, care records, staffing, maintenance and fire safety.
“A range of systems was in place to audit all aspects of the service and to drive continuous improvement.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingSome staff used 'X' instead of the usual 'O' on medicines records when people had taken their own medicines. Managers said they would remind staff of the correct format.
“some staff had written 'X' to note that people administered their own medicine, rather than 'O' which is the usual code.” from the report
CCTV consent
needs fixingCCTV was used in some communal areas, but written consent had not been obtained. Inspectors asked the home to record this consent formally.
“However, their written consent had not been gained and we asked the deputy manager to arrange for these formal consents to be recorded.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that staff use the correct symbols on medicines administration records?
- 02Has written consent now been obtained and recorded for CCTV in communal areas?
- 03How would you support my relative to choose activities that match their interests?
- 04How much choice is available in the daily food and menus?
- 05How will my relative be involved in reviewing their care plan and setting personal goals?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions and the overall rating, with checks of care, staffing, medicines, records and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 April 2017 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 Touchstones
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 December 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
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.