Eastbourne Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to inadequate. This meant there were widespread and significant shortfalls in leadership. Leaders and the culture they created did not assure the delivery of high-quality care.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to governance at the service. 

This service scored 29 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider did not have a shared vision, strategy and culture based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, and engagement. They did not understand the challenges and the needs of people and their communities. At our last assessment staff said staff said that culture and values of the provider were not always inclusive and effective in maintaining standards or driving improvement. Most staff said this was still the case at this latest assessment, with one staff member telling us, “The home does nothing well.”

The provider did not have inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support, or who embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders did not have the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. At our last assessment the provider had been in the process of introducing a new management structure into the home, who were in the process of getting to know people and staff. At this latest assessment leaders had changed again, which meant they had not yet acquired the knowledge and experience of the service to effectively drive improvement. One member of staff said, “We have had three different managers in three months, there is no stability in the home due to lack of leadership. I am hoping the new manager that we have now got stays and does what she can to bring the home back up to how Eastbourne should be.”

People did not feel they could speak up and that their voice would be heard. At our last assessment we received mixed feedback on staff reporting that they felt confident in speaking up with any concerns they had. At this assessment most staff said they felt they could not speak up and that if they did no action would be taken, with one member of staff saying, “We have no trust left in us where management are concerned.”

The provider did not always value diversity in their workforce. They did not always work towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them. At our last assessment we found that there was not a consistent sense from staff that they felt valued and included in how the service was run. This remained the case at this latest assessment, with staff continuing to tell us they did not feel involved in the ongoing development of the service. One member of staff told us, “The atmosphere in the home doesn't help as staff are unsure what is happening.”

The provider did not have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They did not act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, or share this securely with others when appropriate. At our last assessment the provider did not have effective governance systems in place. This remained the case when we returned for this latest assessment. A wide range of quality assurance checks were completed by service leaders, but these had not identified or addressed the issues we found with safety of the premises, medicines management, the consistency of risk management, consent and care records, people’s social engagement or staff wellbeing.

The provider did not understand their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services work seamlessly for people. They did not share information and learning with partners or collaborate for improvement. The service continued to be monitored and supported by the local authority, and healthcare partners told us further progress was needed to ensure people received safe, high-quality care.

The provider did not focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. During this latest assessment we found an ongoing breach of regulation in relation to governance systems, which had not been effective in driving or sustaining improvement across our last 3 assessments of the service. Action plans submitted following our last visit had not been completed in line with assurances given by leaders at the service. We also identified an additional breach of regulation in relation to treating people with dignity and respect.