You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 4 February 2017

This inspection was unannounced and took place on 14 and 15 December 2016.

Whitecliff Care Home provides accommodation for up to 28 people who have a dementia type illness. It is situated in St Leonards on Sea.

There are two managers in post who are going through the process to enable both of them to become registered. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff were very attentive and people were at the heart of everything they did. Staff provided kind, considerate, compassionate care. Staff provided a range of activities and ensured people were engaged with these. Staff knew about the things that were important to people.

Relatives told us people were kept safe and free from harm. There were appropriate numbers of staff employed to meet people’s needs and provide a flexible service.

Staff received regular training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities. They had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and support needs.

There were suitable recruitment procedures and required employment checks were undertaken before staff began to work at the home. Staffing levels and skill mix were planned, implemented and reviewed to keep people safe at all times. Any staff shortages were responded to quickly and appropriately.

The staff understood their role in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and how the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) should be put into practice. These safeguards protect the rights of people by ensuring, if there are any restrictions to their freedom and liberty, these have been authorised by the local authority as being required to protect the person from harm.

Systems, processes and standard operating procedures around medicines were reliable and appropriate to keep people safe. Monitoring the safety of these systems were robust.

Assessments were undertaken to assess any risks to the person using the service and to the staff supporting them. This included environmental risks and any risks due to the health and support needs of the person. The risk assessments we read included information about action to be taken to minimise the chance of harm occurring.

Staff knew the needs of the people they supported and provided a personalised service. Care plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported and families were involved in making decisions about their care.

People were supported to eat and drink. Staff supported people to attend healthcare appointments and liaised with their GP and other healthcare professionals as required to meet people’s needs.

Staff told us the managers were accessible and approachable. Staff and relatives felt able to speak with the managers and provided feedback on the service.

The managers and provider undertook spot checks to review the quality of the service provided and made the necessary improvements to the service.

Inspection areas



Updated 4 February 2017

The service was safe.

Assessments were undertaken of risks to people who used the service and staff. Plans were in place to manage these risks. There were processes for recording accidents and incidents.

People were being protected from abuse because staff understood the correct processes to be followed if abuse were suspected.

People were protected from the risks associated with poor staff recruitment because a full recruitment procedure was followed for new staff. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs.

People could expect to receive their medicines as they had been prescribed because safe systems were in place for the management of medicines.



Updated 4 February 2017

The service was effective.

Staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. Staff received regular training to ensure they had up to date information to undertake their roles and responsibilities.

People were supported to eat and drink according to their plan of care.

Staff supported people to attend healthcare appointments and liaised with other healthcare professionals as required.

People’s rights were respected, and the home was following the best interest’s framework of the MCA. People’s choices were supported.

People’s nutritional needs were assessed to make sure they received a diet that met their needs and wishes.



Updated 4 February 2017

The service was very caring.

Staff were highly motivated and inspired to offer care that was kind and compassionate. Staff provided a strong, visible person-centred culture, where people were at the heart of everything.

Staff were very attentive and we saw positive interactions between staff and people using the service. People responded well to staff.

People’s equality and diversity needs were respected. Staff knew about the things that were important to people.

People’s needs were met by staff who addressed and related to them in a friendly and positive manner. Staff respected people’s individuality and spoke to them with respect.

Staff were respectful of people’s privacy.



Updated 4 February 2017

The service was responsive.

Care plans were in place outlining people’s care and support needs. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s support needs, their interests and preferences in order to provide a personalised service.

People benefitted from engaging in a range of activities.

Relatives felt the staff and manager were approachable and there were regular opportunities to feedback about the service.



Updated 4 February 2017

The service was well-led.

Staff were supported by the managers. There was open communication within the staff team and staff felt comfortable discussing any concerns with the managers.

The managers and the provider checked the quality of the service provided and made sure people were happy with the service they received.