CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Wadhurst Manor
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were in place.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 8 February 2022. It was carried out because the CQC had received concerns about infection prevention and control. Inspectors also asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
Inspectors found the home clean and tidy. Staff had infection prevention training and checks, PPE was available and used properly, and testing, isolation and visiting arrangements were in place. The home had plans for managing outbreaks and keeping people safe.
The service was inspected but not rated. The report gives a finding for safety and infection control, but it does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other four areas.
Infection control training
All staff had received infection prevention and control training and refresher training. Their practice was checked through competency assessments.
“All staff had received Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) training and refreshers.” from the report
Communication with families
Relatives were kept informed about visiting and testing requirements, including when an outbreak happened.
“Families had been kept updated throughout the pandemic to ensure they were aware of visiting and testing requirements.” from the report
Audits and checks
The home completed infection prevention and housekeeping audits, with further checks by the provider.
“Robust IPC and housekeeping audits had been completed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What measures are currently in place if COVID-19 or other infection-related staffing pressures occur?
- 02How are PPE supplies, staff practice and infection prevention competency checked now?
- 03How will you keep our family informed if visiting arrangements change or there is an outbreak?
- 04What are the current arrangements for testing, isolation and admitting new residents safely?
- 05What are the current ratings and findings for caring, effective, responsive and well-led care, which were not covered by this inspection?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with questions about COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other four areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 February 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.
What inspectors found, April 2019
Wadhurst Manor is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with staffing and record issues addressed during the inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection on 21 February 2019. Inspectors spoke with people and relatives, observed care, spoke with staff and reviewed care records, risk assessments, medicines records, complaints and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. People said they felt safe, were treated with dignity and enjoyed the activities and food. Inspectors found that risks, medicines, nutrition and healthcare needs were generally managed well.
There were some issues during the visit. Some people, staff and visitors said there were not always enough staff. Records for as-required medicines and some care planning also needed improvement. The provider took action during and after the inspection, and the inspectors said no further regulatory action was needed at that time.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff understood safeguarding procedures and how to report concerns.
“People were safe and protected from avoidable harm. Legal requirements were met.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that staff treated people with dignity and respected their choices and independence.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Food and health support
People's dietary needs were identified and supported, including risks of choking or malnutrition. Referrals to healthcare professionals were made when needed.
“People with more complex eating and drinking needs were appropriately supported.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could take part in group or one-to-one activities and were encouraged to continue their interests and links with the wider community.
“People enjoyed leisure activities that were important to them.” from the report
Open management
Inspectors found an open culture where staff and people could raise views and concerns. The management team acted on issues identified.
“There was a positive, open and transparent culture across the service.” from the report
Staffing levels
needs fixingSome people, staff and visitors said there were not always enough staff. The deputy manager reviewed staff deployment during the inspection and inspectors said there were then enough staff for assessed needs.
“Some people, staff and visitors said that there weren't always enough staff.” from the report
As-required medicine records
needs fixingProtocols for medicines given when needed were being improved during the inspection. The provider supplied evidence of action taken to improve these records.
“'As required' [PRN] protocols were being improved and developed during this inspection.” from the report
Communication information
minorThe home was still developing its systems for recording people's communication needs under the Accessible Information Standard. The deputy manager said records would be made clearer.
“The provider was developing their systems in relation to the Accessible Information Standard [AIS] at the time of this inspection.” from the report
End-of-life training
minorStaff knew about people's do-not-resuscitate decisions, but further end-of-life care training was still being sourced at the time of the inspection.
“Further training for staff to attend regarding end of life care was being sourced by the development nurse and management of the home at the times of this inspection.” from the report
Registered manager
minorThere was no manager registered with the CQC at the time of the inspection. A newly appointed manager had submitted an application to become registered.
“The service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
- 01What staffing levels are in place now, and how do you respond if there are not enough staff on a shift?
- 02How are as-required medicines recorded, and what checks make sure these records remain complete?
- 03How do you record and share each person's communication needs, including if they go to hospital or another service?
- 04What end-of-life care training have staff completed since this inspection?
- 05Has the manager's application to become registered with the CQC been completed?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the premises, care provided and all five CQC questions; the previous inspection had rated the service Good overall, with Well-led previously rated Requires improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 April 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 Wadhurst Manor
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 September 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
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.