Chardwood Rest Home 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.

Chardwood Rest Home is a detached property close to the seafront in Pevensey Bay. It provides care and support for up to 15 older people with care needs associated with age. This includes people with low physical and health needs and people with mild dementia and memory loss. Chardwood Rest Home provides respite care that includes supporting people while family members are on a break, or to provide additional support to cover an illness.

At the time of this inspection twelve people were living in the service. This inspection took place on 15 and 20 March 2018 and was unannounced.

There is a registered manager at the home. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At the last inspection in January 2017 the provider was rated requires improvement with a breach of regulation 12. This was because the provider had not ensured that appropriate staffing had been maintained in order to ensure people's safety at all times. The provider had not ensured people were handled and moved in a safe way at all times and had not ensured all medicines were stored safely.

At this inspection we found this regulation had been met and the service was rated ‘Good’ overall.

However we found the management arrangements did not ensure effective leadership was in place at all times. When the registered and deputy manager were on annual leave together suitable management arrangements had not been assured. During their absence no one had been designated day to day management responsibility. This meant there was no one able to deal with important management issues quickly. This would include effective responses to safeguarding and emergency situations including fire. We also found some records were not completed in a consistent way. This included consent records, recruitment and medicine records. There was no evidence that the inconsistent records had impacted on care. This lack of management oversight and consistent record keeping was identified to the registered manager as an area for improvement.

People were looked after by staff who knew them well and understood their individual needs. Staff treated people with kindness, they were polite and considerate in their contact with people. People's dignity was protected and staff were respectful. People and their relatives gave us positive feedback about the care, and the atmosphere in the service. One relative said, “Easy going, homely atmosphere, everyone knows their role and they are all competent, It is a lovely little place.” Visiting professionals were confident that staff were kind and caring and responded to people’s health and welfare needs appropriately.

Medicines were stored and handled safely. People were protected from the risk of abuse because staff had a good understanding of safeguarding procedures and knew what they should do if they believed people were at risk of abuse. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The registered manager had an understanding of DoLS and what may constitute a deprivation of liberty and followed correct procedures to protect people's rights.

Staff were provided with a full induction and training programme which supported them to meet the needs of people. Staffing arrangements ensured staff worked in such numbers, with the appropriate skills that people's needs could be met in a timely and safe way.

People were given information on how to make a c

Chardwood Rest Home is a detached property close to the seafront in Pevensey Bay. It provides care and support for up to 15 older people with care needs associated with age. This includes people with low physical and health needs and people with mild dementia and memory loss. Chardwood Rest Home provides respite care that includes supporting people while family members are on a break, or to provide additional support to cover an illness. At the time of this inspection four people were living at the home and one person was on respite care.

There is a registered manager at the home who is also one of the owners and the provider. 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.

Chardwood Rest Home was inspected in March 2015. A number of breaches of the regulations were identified. Improvements were required in relation to the safe management of medicines, recruitment practices, staff training and supervision, the assessment and planning of care to meet people's individual needs and the quality monitoring systems. The provider sent us an action plan and told us they would address these issues by July 2015.

We completed a further comprehensive inspection in January 2016 to check that the provider had made improvements and to confirm that legal requirements had been met. We found improvements had not been made. A number of continuing breaches were identified and the service was rated as inadequate. The CQC took enforcement action and the service was placed into special measures. Warning notices were served along with a condition being placed on the registration of the service which required the provider to give us regular updates against their action plan.

After our inspection in January, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to ensure all regulations would be met. This inspection took place on 11 November 2016 and was a fully comprehensive inspection to see what improvements the provider had made to ensure they had met regulatory requirements. At this inspection four people were living at the service one person was on respite and a further person was being admitted. We found the Warning Notices had been met and significant improvements had been made. However, these will need to be embedded into everyday practice to ensure they are consistently met and maintained when the occupancy of the home increases. We found one breach of a regulation at this inspection.

The staffing arrangements did not ensure two staff were working in the service at all times as recorded on the duty rota during the day and it was unclear who was providing staff cover at night when the registered manager was not available. This meant a suitable number of staff were not available at all times to respond to emergency situations including fire. People were not always safe because moving and handling practices at the service were not always appropriate. When people fell and were unable to get up from the floor staff lifted them manually as suitable equipment was not available. This was a safety risk to people and staff. Medicines that required specific storage arrangements had not been stored appropriately in accordance with required legislation. Staffing arrangements the way staff were moving people and the storage of medicines impacted on how the service was maintaining a safe service and represented a breach to regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

We found the provider had established some quality monitoring systems. They provided reports to CQC as required, in accordance with a condition of registration. However, these systems needed further improvement to ensure robust and effective arrangements w

Chardwood Rest Home is a detached property close to the seafront in Pevensey Bay, a village close to Eastbourne. It provides care and support for up to 15 older people with care needs associated with age. This includes some low physical and health needs and some support needs for people with mild dementia and memory loss. Chardwood Rest Home provides some respite that includes supporting people while family members are on a break or provide additional support to cover an illness. Chardwood Rest Home also provides more complex needs to people, including people who are at risk of pressure area damage and people who live with diabetes. At the time of this inspection eight people were living at the home.

There is a registered manager at the home who is also one of the owners and the provider. 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.

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection at Chardwood Rest Home on the 26 February and 3 March 2015 where we found improvements were required in relation to the safe management of medicines, recruitment practice, staff training and supervision, the assessment and planning of care to meet people’s individual needs and the quality monitoring systems. The

provider sent us an action plan and told us they would address these issues by July 2015.

We undertook this inspection on 27 and 29 January 2016 to check that the provider had made improvements and to confirm that legal requirements had been met. We found improvements had not been made and the provider was not meeting a number of the regulations.

Medicines were not always managed safely. Records were not accurate and systems did not ensure that variable dosage medicines and other prescribed medicines were given as required.

Recruitment records did not confirm the provider had assured themselves that staff working had relevant checks undertaken to ensure they were suitable to work with people at risk.

Suitable environmental risk assessments and measures put in place to ensure people’s safety within the home had not been established.

Suitable training had not been provided to all staff to ensure they had the knowledge, skills and competence to undertake their designated responsibilities within the home.

People did not have clear and accurate person centred care plans to reflect all their care needs. We could not be assured that staff knew and understood people’s individual care needs.

The registered manager had not established quality monitoring systems across the service. Ways of reviewing the care and improving the care and quality of the service were not in place. She had not addressed breaches of regulations identified at the last inspection and remained in breach of five regulations.

Feedback received from people and their representatives was positive about the care, the approach of the staff and atmosphere in the home. Staff were kind, friendly and patient with people. Staff were mindful to people’s privacy and dignity, taking account their individuality.

People had a variety of food available at mealtimes. Meals were unrushed and people were encouraged and supported to eat independently. There were systems to monitor people’s diet and to support them in maintaining good nutrition.

Systems for sharing information between staff were established. Staff understood their responsibilities to identify and respond to any safeguarding issue. Regular and appropriate contact with health care professionals took place, to ensure people’s health care needs were responded to.

People had their choices and preferences responded to by staff who understood their responsibilities in ensuring they gained consent to care. The registered manager

Chardwood Rest Home is a detached property close to the seafront in Pevensey Bay a village close to Eastbourne. It provides care and support for up to 15 older people with care needs associated with age. This included some low physical and health needs and some support needs for people with mild dementia and memory loss. The care home provides some respite care and can meet more complex care needs with community support, including people who are at risk of pressure area damage and people who live with diabetes. At the time of this inspection eight people were living at the home.

This inspection took place on 26 February and 3 March 2015 and was unannounced

There is a registered manager at the home who is also one of the owners. 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.

Medicines were not always managed safely. Records were not always accurate and systems did not ensure that variable dosage medicines and other prescribed medicines were given as required.

Recruitment records did not confirm the provider had assured themselves that staff working had relevant checks undertaken to ensure they were suitable to work with people at risk.

Suitable training had not been provided to all staff to ensure they had the knowledge, skills and competence to undertake their designated responsibilities within the home.

People had their care needs assessed but the care plans did not reflect all the care needs of people and we could not be assured that staff knew and understood people’s individual care needs.

The provider had not established quality monitoring systems across the service. Ways of reviewing the care and improving the care and quality of the service were not in place.

The service was clean and provided communal areas that had been improved recently. However, all the risks associated with the home had not been assessed or responded to. Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe from abuse. However, they were not clear what action to take to refer any concerns on to the appropriate authority. People said they were safe and risk assessments were used to minimise risks for people.

However, there were some good aspects of care. Feedback received from people and their representatives through the inspection process was positive about the care, the approach of the staff and atmosphere in the home. One relative said, “I would have no hesitation in recommending the home, I am very happy with the way they care for my mother.” Staff were kind, friendly and patient with people. Staff were mindful to people’s privacy and dignity taking account their individuality.

People had a variety of food available at mealtimes, these were unrushed and people were encouraged and supported to eat independently. There were systems to monitor people’s diet and ensure people who were not eating enough were appropriately supported.

Systems for sharing information between staff were established. Staff had regular contact with each other and the registered manager. Staff ensured regular and appropriate contact with health care professionals to ensure people’s health care needs were responded to in a timely fashion.

People had their choices and preferences responded to by staff who understood their responsibilities in ensuring they gained consent to care. The registered manager had a working knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They had applied for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) in the past and ensured people had their rights taken into consideration if any restriction was considered.

Activity, entertainment and staff interaction was reflective to individual tastes. There was a choice of arranged activity including group and one to one interaction. People were looking forward to more outside walks and trips when the weather improved, which the registered manager and staff said would be provided.

The registered manager had a high profile in the home and managed by regular contact with staff people and relatives. She lived on the premises and staff knew where she was if they needed her.

There were a number of breaches of the regulations. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.