CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Wentworth Close
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, skilled support, but weekend staffing, health communication and records needed improvement.
The inspection took place on 9 and 14 January 2020. One inspector visited, observed people and staff, spoke with staff and a relative, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records. People could not give their views verbally because of complex communication needs.
The home was caring and effective. Staff knew people well, treated them with kindness, and had training in autism and positive behaviour support. People were supported with medicines, health appointments, daily living skills, activities and links with the local community.
There were important shortfalls. Weekend staffing did not show how funded one-to-one support was provided, so activities outside the home could not be offered. Some health information was not acted on quickly enough, and care and daily records did not always show the support given. The home breached Regulation 17 on good governance.
The overall rating stayed at Requires Improvement, as it was at the previous inspection. Effective and Caring remained Good. Safe fell from Good to Requires Improvement, while Responsive and Well-led remained Requires Improvement. The provider was asked for an action plan and will be monitored until the next inspection.
Kind and respectful care
Staff were seen to treat people with kindness, dignity and respect. Relatives and professionals also said staff knew people well and cared for them properly.
“People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff.” from the report
Specialist staff training
Staff received training suited to people's complex needs, including autism, positive behaviour support and epilepsy. Inspectors saw staff follow a person's care plan confidently.
“Specialist training was also provided that reflected the complex needs of people who lived at Wentworth Close.” from the report
Support for independence
People were encouraged to build skills through everyday tasks such as laundry, using the dishwasher and helping with food preparation.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Activities and community links
People were supported to follow their interests and use local facilities. Activities included bowling, walks, cafes, restaurants, music and gardening.
“People were supported to carry out every day activities and to be part of the local community.” from the report
Medicine safety
The home had procedures for ordering, storing, giving and recording medicines. Staff worked in pairs and had training and competency checks.
“There were safe procedures to ensure medicines were correctly ordered, stored, given and recorded appropriately.” from the report
Weekend staffing
needs fixingRotas and daily records did not show how funded one-to-one hours were provided at weekends. Inspectors said the staffing level meant activities outside the home could not be provided.
“With three staff on duty at weekends this meant activities outside of the house could not be provided.” from the report
Health information and response
seriousOne person's health information was not communicated well, and there was no risk assessment or care plan for one health need. There were also delays in seeking medical advice and arranging healthcare.
“There was a delay in seeking medical advice regarding another potential health concern for this person.” from the report
Incomplete care records
needs fixingDaily records did not always show what activities people had done, what choices they had been offered, or whether enough food and drink had been offered. This made it harder to confirm that care matched people's plans.
“Daily records lacked detail.” from the report
Weak quality checks
seriousManagement checks did not identify several record-keeping problems. Incidents were reviewed individually, but there was no overall analysis to identify patterns or lessons.
“The provider had not ensured that the quality assurance checks were sufficiently robust to identify the shortfalls we found in relation to records.” from the report
- 01How are funded one-to-one support hours now provided at weekends, and how often can residents go out?
- 02What system is now used to make sure health concerns, professional advice and appointments are passed to the right people and acted on promptly?
- 03How do you check that daily records accurately show activities, choices, food, drink and support given?
- 04What changes have been made to analyse incidents for patterns and lessons, including the use of ABC charts?
- 05How are medicines audits, fire drill records and other quality checks now completed and reviewed?
This was a planned inspection of the care home covering all five CQC questions, including both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 February 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, January 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, effective and caring support, but activities, communication records and management systems needed work.
This was the home’s first inspection under its current provider. Inspectors visited on 29 November 2018, observed care, spoke with managers and care staff, reviewed care, medicines and staffing records, and later spoke with relatives and professionals.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Caring. People had suitable staffing, detailed risk assessments and safely managed medicines. Staff knew people well, supported their choices, and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Responsive and Well-led. Activities outside the home had reduced during a difficult period of staff changes. Communication tools and some care records were not sufficiently adapted for people, and mental capacity records did not always show people's views or how decisions had been reached.
The interim management team had been in place for about a month and had already started improvements. The overall rating Requires Improvement means the home was not consistently meeting the standard expected, although inspectors found the impact of the shortfalls on people was low at the time.
Safe staffing and risk planning
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, despite recent staff changes. Risk assessments covered personal, health, activity and environmental risks.
“There were detailed assessments of risk for people and the environment.” from the report
Medicines were managed safely
Staff were trained and checked as competent before giving medicines. Records showed people received medicines as prescribed and in line with their preferences.
“People's medicines were safely managed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People had positive relationships with staff. Staff respected privacy and dignity and encouraged people to do as much as possible for themselves.
“Staff had built good relationships with people and genuinely cared for their wellbeing.” from the report
Staff understood people's needs
Training covered autism, epilepsy, safeguarding, medicines and other relevant areas. Staff used people's preferred ways of communicating and followed specialist health guidance.
“Staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people's needs effectively.” from the report
Managers acted on concerns
The interim management team had recognised the main problems and had begun making changes. Inspectors found them responsive to concerns raised during the inspection.
“During inspection we found the interim management team to be very responsive to concerns we raised.” from the report
Activities had reduced
needs fixingActivities outside the home were not as regular as before. Swimming and bowling had stopped, although managers were planning improvements.
“However, activities outside the home were not as frequent.” from the report
Communication records were not adapted enough
needs fixingSome people needed pictures or other tools to communicate, but care plans, menus and reviews used few pictures. Planned choice boards and an easy-read complaints form were not yet in place.
“People's care plans, menus and review documentation were written, with minimal pictures.” from the report
Mental capacity records were incomplete
seriousRecords did not always show people's views or how decisions about capacity had been reached. This also applied to restrictions such as locks on doors.
“There was no evidence to demonstrate the person's views had been considered and how the decision for a lack of capacity was reached.” from the report
End-of-life wishes had not been explored
needs fixingNo one was receiving end-of-life care during the inspection, but people had not been asked about their wishes or involved in advance planning.
“However, people had not been asked about their wishes nor had any advanced planning been considered.” from the report
Recent staffing disruption
minorRelatives raised concerns about a lot of staff changes, and some staff support and meetings had lapsed. Managers had changed the structure and recruited additional staff.
“The service had been through a difficult period of losing staff.” from the report
- 01Which activities outside the home, including swimming and bowling, are now available and how often?
- 02Are picture-based care plans, menus, review documents and choice boards now being used with each person who needs them?
- 03How do you record the person's views and the reasons for decisions about mental capacity?
- 04How are restrictions such as locks on doors assessed, reviewed and recorded for each person?
- 05What has changed in staffing, supervision and team meetings since the recent staffing difficulties?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating; it was the first inspection under the current provider, although the same people had lived at the home under a different provider. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 January 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 Wentworth Close
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- February 2020Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2019Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 October 2017.
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.