• Care Home
  • Care home

Westerleigh Nursing Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

18 Corsica Road, Seaford, East Sussex, BN25 1BD (01323) 892335

Provided and run by:
Regency Medicine Ltd

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 22 July 2021

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. We had received information of concern about infection control and prevention measures at another home owned by the same provider as this service. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 2 July 2021 and was announced.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 22 July 2021

About the service:

Westerleigh is registered to provide nursing, care and accommodation for up to 30 people. There were 28 people living in the service when we visited. People cared for were mainly older people who were living with a range of care needs, including arthritis, diabetes and heart conditions. Some people were also living with dementia. Most people needed support with their personal care, eating, drinking or mobility. Accommodation was provided over two floors.

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

Although regular quality audits were completed to manage oversight of the service, we found improvements were needed for the management of pressure relieving equipment to ensure they were always correctly set and for medicine record keeping. For both these concerns, we considered the risk and impact on people to be mitigated. The manager acknowledged these were areas for improvement and immediately rectified these shortfalls.

People told us they experienced safe care. People told us, “It’s safe here, it’s clean and I love the garden.” Another person said, “Everything is okay, my family know I’m safe and get the care that I need, but I would like to be closer to them.” A relative said, “The staff are all very good, I know my mother is safe and looked after. Staff will always make time to talk to us.”

Training, policy guidance and safe systems of work minimised the risk of people being exposed to harm. Staff understood how to safeguard people at risk and how to report any concerns they may have. Medicines were administered safely by competent staff. Safe recruitment practices had been followed before staff started working at the service. Staff were deployed with the correct training, skills and experience to meet people’s needs. Nursing staff received clinical supervision and training. The premises were clean and infection control measures followed. People told us the home was clean and tidy. Relatives spoken with had no concerns about the cleanliness of the service. People’s needs and the individual risks they may face were assessed and recorded. Incidents and accidents were recorded and checked or investigated by the registered manager to see what steps could be taken to prevent these happening again. This ensured lessons were learnt.

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 supported this practice. The care offered was inclusive and based on policies about Equality, Diversity and Human Rights. Care plans had been developed to assist staff to meet people’s needs in an effective way. Staff applied best practice principles, which led to effective outcomes for people and supported a good quality of life. The care plans were reviewed and updated. Referrals were made appropriately to outside agencies when required. For example, GPs, community nurses and speech and language therapists (SALT). People’s nutritional needs were monitored and reviewed. People had a choice of meals provided and staff knew people’s likes and dislikes.

Staff treated people with respect and kindness and were passionate about providing a quality service that was person centred. Confidential information was held securely. People had received an updated privacy policy and policy statements following changes to data protection legislation in May 2018.

The care was designed to ensure people's independence was encouraged and maintained. Staff supported people with their mobility and encouraged them to remain active. Activities were provided and were under review as it was known that improvements were needed. People were involved in their care planning. End of life care planning and documentation guided staff in providing care at this important stage of people’s lives. End of life care was delivered professionally and with compassion.

People, their relatives and health care professionals had the opportunity to share their views about the service. Complaints made by people or their relatives were taken seriously and thoroughly investigated.

Rating at last inspection:

Good. (Report published on 22 November 2016.)

Why we inspected:

This inspection took place as part of our planned programme of inspections.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.