You are here

Carewatch (Cranbrook Court) Requires improvement

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 15 July 2021

Carewatch (Cranbrook Court)) is a domiciliary care service situated in Langley, Eastbourne, East Sussex. They provide personal care for people living in extra care housing in a purpose-built block of flats that could accommodate up to 62 people. Extra care housing is designed for people who need some help to look after themselves, but not at the level provided by a residential care home. People living in extra care housing have their own accommodation and have care staff that are available when required either contracted or in an emergency.

The people supported by the service had a wide range of needs including decreased mobility, general frailty, dementia, care needs related to age and people who live with a learning disability. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. There were 32 people being supported with personal care by Carewatch (Cranbrook Court) at this time.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Systems and processes to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided were in place. However, not all were effective at this inspection. For example, medicine audits were undertaken but were lacking detail, for example, had the medicine been missed and of possible impact on people of not receiving their essential medicines. There were shortfalls in the care plans and risk assessments that had not been identified through the audits of care plans. Feedback from people and staff had not always been acted on.

Not everyone’s specific health needs were identified and planned for to promote responsive care to ensure their safety and well-being, for example, risk assessments for risk of choking were not consistently completed. People who lived with a mental health disorder did not have person specific care plans and risk assessments to enable staff to ensure their health and well-being. COVID-19, person-specific risk assessments were not seen in files at the time of inspection so there was no guidance or information to guide staff. The Manager rectified this.

The service were not following their medicine policy in the management of medicines, which meant there was an element of potential risk to people and staff. The risk of harm to people had not always been mitigated as incidents and accidents were not consistently reported, recorded and investigated.

People received care and support by staff who had been appropriately trained to recognise signs of abuse or risk and understood what to do to safely support people. One person told us they “Totally trust the staff here, I feel safe with the care staff.” People were supported to take positive risks, to ensure they had as much choice and control of their lives as possible. We saw that people were supported to be as independent as possible with their personal care and mobility.

There was minimal evidence that learning from incidents and accidents took place. Specific details and follow up actions by staff to prevent a re-occurrence were not clearly documented. Action from incidents and accidents were not shared with all staff or analysed by the management team to look for any trends or patterns.

Staff received essential training to meet people’s needs. All new staff completed an induction programme where they got to know people and their needs well. One staff member said, “We do receive regular training, and refreshers.” Where there was an assessed need, people were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. Referrals and advice were sought from relevant health care professionals to ensure people remained as healthy as possible. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 15 July 2021

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 15 July 2021

The service was effective.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 15 July 2021

Responsive

Good

Updated 15 July 2021

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 15 July 2021

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.