Archived: Blatchington Court

Updated 14 June 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type:

Blatchington Court is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided and both were looked at during this inspection. Blatchington Court can accommodate up to 20 older people living with dementia.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection.

What we did:

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included information from other agencies and statutory notifications sent to us by the registered manager about events that had occurred at the service. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law. We used all this information to decide which areas to focus on during our inspection. Due to technical problems, the provider was not able to complete a Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection:

We spoke with three people and spent time observing the care and support people received. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We also spoke with two relatives and a friend of one person who lived at the home. We spoke with the registered manager, office manager, deputy manager and two care staff. We reviewed a range of records. These included two care records, two staff files and records relating to the management of the home.

After the inspection:

We received additional information which we requested at inspection to be emailed to us. This included staff training records, staff supervision and observation documents and staff recruitment.

Updated 14 June 2019

About the service:

Blatchington Court is a residential care home that provides residential and personal care for up to 20 older people, all of whom are living with dementia. At the time of this inspection, 17 people were living at the home.

People’s experience of using this service:

People and their relatives spoke highly of the home and felt it was well-led and managed, with a high standard of care. Opportunities to drive continual improvement had been taken and a robust system of audits monitored and measured the service. An analysis of falls that people had sustained had resulted in an additional member of staff being employed during the early part of the day. This had brought about a reduction in the number of falls.

The use of technology had enabled people to share their views about the service they received in an accessible way. Feedback was positive. Staff enjoyed working at the home and were motivated by management to do their jobs well and to a high standard. For example, there was an ‘Employee of the month’ scheme, where a member of staff was nominated by their peers and could receive gift vouchers for exceptional work.

People felt safe living at the home and their risks had been identified and assessed, so that staff knew how to support people. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and new staff were recruited safely. Systems were effective in ensuring people received their medicines as required. The home was clean and smelled fresh.

People’s needs and choices were met by staff who knew them well. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and support and had completed a range of training. Staff had regular supervisions and attended staff meetings.

A choice of meals was available to people. Where needed, staff supported people to eat their meals. The home was comfortable and rooms were personalised. 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. People were supported by a range of healthcare professionals and services.

People were looked after by kind and caring staff who were patient, warm and friendly. People were encouraged to be involved in all aspects of their care and were treated with dignity and respect.

Care plans provided staff with detailed information and guidance for staff about people’s support needs, their likes, dislikes and preferences. Activities were organised and musical entertainers were popular, visiting the home three times a week. People had the opportunity to have dedicated one-to-one time with a staff member and could choose how they wanted to spend a ‘Golden Hour’ with staff.

Rating at last inspection:

At the last inspection, this service was rated as Good (published in November 2016).

Why we inspected:

This inspection took place in line with CQC scheduling guidelines for adult social care services.

Follow up:

We will review the service in line with our methodology for ‘Good’ services.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk