Eastbourne Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people's needs.

At our last inspection under the previous provider, we rated this key question good. Following this assessment, the rating for this key question has changed to requires improvement. This meant people's needs were not always met.

The provider was in breach of 2 legal regulations in relation to the safe care and treatment of people and good governance.

This service scored 61 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People did not always receive person-centred care which met their needs and wishes.

We received feedback from 3 people that staff did not always provide person centred care at night.

The quality of people’s care plans was varied. Some people’s care plans were not always accurate or up to date. We identified shortfalls relating to people’s specific medical conditions, the management of distressed behaviours, medicines management, continence care and nutrition and hydration which posed a risk to people’s health and wellbeing.

Records did not always evidence that people’s care and treatment was delivered in a way that met their assessed needs. This posed a risk to people’s health and wellbeing.

The home was going through a period of change. The provider had taken steps to ensure continuity of care and make sure people were supported by staff they were

familiar with.

People told us they knew most of the staff that supported them.

Visiting health and social professionals told us staff contacted them if there were any concerns about people’s care.

Since 2016 onwards all organisations that provide publicly funded adult social care are legally required to follow the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The standard was introduced to make sure people are given information in a way they can understand. The standard applies to all people with a disability, impairment or sensory loss and in some circumstances to their carers.

The provider was meeting the AIS. People’s communication needs were recorded. We reviewed one person’s communication care plan which was being updated with new techniques that had been found to be successful.

An effective system was not fully in place to demonstrate how the provider was listening to and involving people.

Records did not always demonstrate how complaints and concerns were fully addressed and investigated.

Processes were being embedded to support people and relatives to provide feedback and raise any issues.

People had equal access to care, treatment and support.

Health care professionals visited on a regular basis to review people’s needs and were contacted in between visits. Visiting health professionals spoke positively about the home.

People had equal opportunities to access care and support. Policies and procedures were in place to help ensure people’s rights were upheld in relation to promoting equity in experiences and outcomes.

People and relatives raised no concerns in relation to this area.

Records relating to people’s end of life wishes were not always person centred. Action was being taken to update people’s care plans.

Staff explained if someone was nearing the end of their life they would sit with the person to provide comfort and support.

Staff had identified further training in this area would be beneficial. This was being reviewed.