CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Whitecliff Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff on each shift, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments and safe medicines arrangements. Safeguarding and infection control systems were also in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's care needs, nutrition and health needs were assessed and reviewed. However, some mental capacity records were not decision-specific, and staff had not yet received learning disability training.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew people well, offered choices and encouraged independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences and changing needs. People were supported with communication, activities, relationships, complaints and end-of-life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The home had approachable managers, a positive atmosphere and good links with health and social care professionals. However, audits had not identified gaps in training, capacity assessments, best-interest records or some activity records.
What inspectors found, March 2023
Whitecliff Care Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care, but the home was not always well-led.
This was an unannounced inspection on 02 March 2023. Two inspectors spoke with people, staff, relatives and professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files, training records, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, person-centred care, respectful support, good communication and activities. People were supported to access health care and maintain relationships.
The Well-led rating was Requires Improvement. Staff had not yet received learning disability training. Some mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions were not recorded in enough detail. Quality checks had not found these issues. The manager took action during and after the inspection, but inspectors said the changes needed time to become established.
Staffing and safety
Inspectors found enough staff on every shift, including a registered nurse. Call bells were answered promptly and recruitment checks had been completed.
“There were enough staff on duty every shift to support people safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were patient, kind and respectful. People were given time during personal care and meals, and were encouraged to remain as independent as possible.
“People were treated with respect and dignity. We observed interactions between staff and people that were positive and supportive.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's preferences, routines and changing needs. Staff knew people well and supported day-to-day choices.
“Care plan documents were person-centred. People's personal preferences as well as their day to day health and social care needs were clearly recorded.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were offered group and one-to-one activities. The home also supported trips out and helped people keep in contact with others.
“People were supported to participate in their chosen social and leisure interests on a regular basis.” from the report
Learning disability training
needs fixingStaff had training in several key areas but had not been trained specifically to support people with learning disabilities. The manager enrolled all staff on training after inspectors raised this.
“However, staff had not received training in respect of supporting people with learning disabilities.” from the report
Mental capacity records
needs fixingSome mental capacity assessments were generic rather than linked to a specific decision. Records did not always show whether people had agreed to share bedrooms or whether this was in their best interests.
“In some plans assessments were not decision specific, as required but were generic and only referred to a decision relating to the place of care.” from the report
Quality checks
needs fixingThe home's audits had not found the gaps in training and decision records. Inspectors said the improvements needed time to become embedded.
“Although auditing covered all aspects of the service, the process had failed to identify the lack of decision specific mental capacity assessments for some people.” from the report
Recording one-to-one activities
needs fixingRecords showed that one person who spent all their time in their room had received only two one-to-one activity sessions in a month. The home introduced a communication book to make recording easier.
“This showed that a person had only received two one to one activity sessions in the past month.” from the report
- 01Has all staff training on supporting people with learning disabilities now been completed?
- 02How do you record and review a person's capacity for each important decision, including sharing a bedroom?
- 03How are best-interest decisions recorded and checked?
- 04How do you make sure one-to-one activities are offered and recorded for people who spend much of their time in their room?
- 05How will you check that the improvements identified at this inspection have been completed and maintained?
This was an unannounced inspection that looked at all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 March 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, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control measures were in place.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 28 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control and asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
The inspectors said they were assured about visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, hygiene, outbreak management and the infection control policy. Visitors used a booking system, showed a negative test, had their temperature checked and wore masks.
The home used agency staff from one agency. Those staff had an induction and followed the home's COVID-19 testing and training requirements. The home also had domestic and laundry staff covering seven days a week.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a rated judgement for the five key questions.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, providing testing and keeping its infection control policy up to date.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Managing visitors
The home used booked visiting times to reduce the number of visitors at once. Visitors had to provide a negative test, have their temperature checked and wear masks.
“The provider had complied with visiting guidelines throughout the pandemic and at the time of the inspection were using a booking system with relatives and loved ones” from the report
Staff induction
The home used agency staff from one agency during the pandemic. These staff received an induction and followed the home's COVID-19 testing and training requirements.
“Agency staff only worked at Whitecliff care home during the pandemic and were provided with an induction and complied with the home policies for covid-19 testing and training requirements” from the report
Environmental improvements
Environmental checks identified that dining room doors were no longer fit for purpose, and the doors were replaced.
“Environmental audits of the home, carried out in response to the pandemic, had highlighted issues with dining room doors that were no longer fit for purpose and had been replaced.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now?
- 02How are visitors currently booked and what checks are required before visiting?
- 03How many agency staff are being used now, and are they still from one agency?
- 04How does the home check that agency staff have completed the required induction and training?
- 05What measures are in place if COVID-19 or other staffing pressures affect staffing levels?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other key questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 March 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 Whitecliff Care Home
2 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 November 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
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.