The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Eastfield

Overall: Inadequate read more about inspection ratings

76 Sittingbourne Road, Maidstone, Kent, ME14 5HY (01622) 755153

Provided and run by:
Bureaucom Limited

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

We completed the assessment between the 14 and 16 October 2024. The provider had failed to ensure that people’s health risks were well managed, or that people were supported by suitably qualified and competent staff. Risks to the environment, including infection prevention and control risks were not well managed. Medicines had not been managed safely. People were not treated with dignity, kindness and respect. There was a lack of effective oversight of the service, to identify and make improvements. Audits and checks that were completed had not identified the serious and widespread issues within this assessment.

We found significant shortfalls across the service and identified 7 breaches of regulation including, providing people with person centred care, dignity and respect, need for consent, safe care and treatment, staffing, safeguarding and good governance. We took urgent action to prevent the provider from taking new admissions, or re admissions without the written agreement of CQC. We placed conditions on the provider’s registration for them to send us action plans advising us how they planned to improve the service. This service is being placed in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we user our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide. In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded.

30 April 2018

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on 30 April and 1 May 2018 and was unannounced.

Eastfield is registered to provide accommodation and care for up to 43 older people. Offering both residential care and dementia care. Bedrooms are situated on two floors and there is a shaft lift so that they are accessible for people with mobility difficulties. All bedrooms are single occupancy with en-suite facilities. There were 32 people living at the service at the time of our inspection, some of which were living with dementia.

At our last inspection, we rated the service as good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

A registered manager was employed at the service and had been in the position for a period of 18 months. 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. The registered manager was supported by a deputy manager and an area manager.

People continued to be protected from the risk of harm or abuse. Risks to people were assessed and minimised. There were sufficient staff deployed to keep people safe meet their needs. Staff had been recruited safely. People received their medicines safely from staff that had been trained and had their competency assessed.

People were protected by the prevention and control of infection where possible, with systems in place to ensure the risk of contamination were minimised. Accidents and incidents continued to be managed effectively.

People continued to have their needs and choices assessed when they started using the service, either as respite or on a permanent basis. People received care that was personalised to their needs. People were supported to take part in meaningful activities which they enjoyed. People were encouraged to raise concerns or complaints.

People continued to be encouraged to make their own choices about their lives. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People and staff were asked for their feedback about the service, with action taken if any suggestions or concerns were raised.

People continued to be given a choice at mealtimes and were able to access drinks and snacks throughout the day. People’s nutrition and hydration needs had been assessed and recorded. Staff and the chef met people’s specific dietary needs and support. Staff ensured people remained as healthy as possible with support from health care professionals, if required.

Staff continued to be trained to meet people’s needs including any specialist needs. Staff were given feedback, support and guidance from their line manager, through regular supervision meetings. Staff were seen to be kind and compassionate towards people. People and their relatives were involved with making decisions about care and support. People were treated with privacy and dignity.

There was an inclusive, open and transparent nature to the service. The registered manager understood the legal requirements of their role. Systems continued to be in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided to people. There was a range of checks and audits carried out to ensure the safety and quality of the service that was provided to people.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

26 October 2015

During a routine inspection

The inspection was carried out on 26 October and was unannounced.

The service provides care for older people some of whom can no longer care for themselves at home or who have a diagnosis of dementia. Eastfield is a homely, warm and welcoming residential home with a positive and friendly atmosphere. At the time of our inspection the service was providing support to 43 people and had no vacancies.

There was a registered manager employed at the home. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home. 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 home is run.

All the staff were very committed to providing person centred individualised care. Staff at the home were open to trying new ways of caring for people with dementia, such as using Ambient Odour sessions which has also benefited everyone else living at the home.

Staff were very aware of each person’s potential and encouraged everyone to maintain and build on their independence. All staff were really engaged with all the people living at the home, they were caring and sensitive to their needs.

The registered manager supported all the staff, making sure that staff had the opportunity to share ideas or concerns and issues. Staff spoken to said that the manager always has time to listen to them and they feel part of the larger team. We found that all the staff were committed to providing the best service they can. Staff said that there is always a good atmosphere, and it is a happy place to work, their positive attitude was also picked up by the people they are looking after. There were so many smiling faces during our inspection.

There was enough staff to meet people’s needs and to ensure they were able to access activities in and out of the home. The provider operated safe and robust recruitment and selection procedures. The manager also asks some of the residents to meet w recruits and give their opinion.

Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity. All communications between staff and people were caring and respectful. Staff were patient, kind and compassionate. It was apparent that the people were extremely fond of all the staff, there was lots of eye contact and appropriate touching such as holding someone’s hand, people were obviously comfortable and happy talking to the staff.

We saw that staff had learnt from previous safeguarding, for example we saw new measures had been introduced to audit the medicine administration more effectively to keep people safe. There were very comprehensive audits carried out by the management team to ensure the high quality of the service was being preserved.

Records and conversation with the registered manager, staff and relatives showed that people were listened to and complaints or concerns were taken seriously and responded to appropriately. There was a clear complaints procedure which was available in people’s rooms and another copy was available on the notice board.

Each member of staff had received training to make sure that they had the skills and understanding to carry out their job role safely. All staff were given the understanding to work with people who have a diagnosis of dementia no matter what their job role was. We saw that staff training was up to date and refresher courses had been booked in a timely way. Each member of staff at regular supervision, and they also had an annual appraisal.

Staff had received training in Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) to make sure they understood how to protect people’s rights. There were guidance in relation MCA and people were asked for their consent before staff carried out any care or treatment. CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. The registered manager and staff ensured that people were supported in ways that did not restrict their freedom and were looked after appropriately.

All of the comments about the food were excellent. Food was all home cooked and much of the food was locally sourced. Staff supported people with dementia exceptionally well to maintain their health by ensuring people had enough to eat and drink. They found ways of making sure people who were reluctant to sit and eat had food items and drinks available that they could pick up, eat and drink whilst walking around the home. People’s food and drink intake was monitored closely by the staff and when there were concerns, staff responded quickly trying new ways to temp the person to eat.

The registered manager had looked at different ways to enhance people's lives in the home. They had taken the advice from care professionals and looked at new innovative ways of minimising for example disruptive behaviour at certain times of the day. Staff had worked with the registered manager on implementing new ways to improve the standard of living for all the people. Staff were very enthusiastic about what they had been able to do to improve people's lives.

People who used the service, family members and external agencies were highly complementary about the standard of care provided. The registered manager involved families and other agencies to ensure people received the support they needed to express their views and make decisions that were in their best interests.

Activities were a very important part of what happened in the home on a daily basis. We saw different activities happening, appealing to different interests or abilities of the individual. We saw people being encouraged and supported to engage with the activities they wished to part of. The Friends of Eastfield often help with activities by arranging themed nights. Outings were very much looked forward to, and staff told us they are always trying to think of new suitable places to go.

The registered manager used effective systems to continually monitor the quality of the service and had ongoing plans for improving the service people received. The provider gathered information about the quality of their service from a variety of sources including people who used the service, their family and friends and external agencies. This was used to enable the registered manager to identify where improvement was needed and to implement and sustain continuous improvements.

2 July 2014

During a routine inspection

We found that the registered manger was supportive and responsive to the needs of the staff team. Staff were trained and supervised appropriately.

We saw from the records we looked at that staff had received a formal induction when they started working at the service. We spoke with a new member of staff. They told us about their experience of their first few weeks of employment. They told us that their progress during their induction was monitored by the manager. Explained that they had a work book and this had areas of competence that had to be signed off. They told us that they had worked alongside an experienced member of staff before they delivered support themselves. The manager also explained how when a new member of staff had started work at the home they received regular supervision, the staff member confirmed this and said that to start with they would speak with the manager several times a week about the their work and any issues they may have had. This meant that new staff were supported and had reached an appropriate level of competency before they worked as part of the team.

There was a training plan in place for all staff. We found that staff had received on-going training for example in administering medication, moving and handling, infection control, health and safety and dementia. Staff we spoke with confirmed that their training was reviewed and that they attended refresher training. For example one member of staff said. 'I have had on-going training and I have completed an NVQ level 2.' We noted that many of the staff had received specialist training from a continuing care nurse in relation to end of life care. We saw that staff had also received training in dementia care awareness. People who used the service told us that they knew staff attended training and that they felt staff were good at their jobs. This meant that staff had received training that related to the needs of the people they were supporting.

We talked with three staff and they told us that the manager was approachable and supportive. During our inspection we observed that the manager spoke to staff professionally and appropriately. All of the staff we spoke with were complimentary of the support and training they received. 'One said 'The manager is very approachable'. Another said, 'I have found all the staff here and the manager very supportive'. This meant that staff were supported to work effectively.

17 October 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We spoke with three people living at the service and to two groups of relatives. They told us that they were satisfied with the standard of the decor and told us that the home was adequately maintained. People also told us that the heating had been fixed and that all areas of the home were at an appropriate temperature.

13 May 2013

During an inspection in response to concerns

We spoke with five people living at the service. They told us that staff understood their individual needs and treated them with kindness and respect. People said that their preferred daily routines were respected and that they enjoyed the lifestyle and activities they experienced at the service.

When we visited people told us that the food had vastly improved recently with the appointment of a new chef. One person said that the meals were 'very good, I can't fault the food'.

We received information that expressed concerns about how the manager cooperated with other providers. We found that there had been a lack of consistency about sharing information when people were moving to other services.

We received information about the standards of the premises and grounds not being adequately maintained. We found that some areas of the home were not adequately maintained. People told us that the heating at the home was 'Always a problem' and that some areas were too hot and others too cold.

We found that the numbers of staff on duty were adequate to meet the needs of people living at the service.

6 August 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We spoke with six people living at the home and the relatives of two people. People were happy living at the home and said they liked the activities and lifestyle they experienced at the home.

Some specific comments included 'I would recommend this place to anyone' and 'I am really pleased my relative was placed here, the staff are very caring and kind'.

People said that the food was good, one person said 'The food is very nice, you couldn't wish for better', another said 'there's plenty of choice'. One person told us that she liked spicy food, and that the chef had said that if her meal wasn't to her liking that day that she would take it away and 'spice it up'.

People told us that they attended the residents meetings which were held regularly and found this a good opportunity to talk about the menu's and activities planned. They said they felt listened too, and that comments they made were acted on.

People told us that the staff were 'excellent', one person said 'The staff are very helpful, very kind and everyone is made very welcome'.

12 January 2012

During a routine inspection

People living at the home told us that they felt there were insufficient staff on duty. One person said 'The staff are reasonable but there is not enough of them. I have to wait a long time to be escorted to my room". 'At night time, some people have to shout for help'. Other comments received were, 'We have waited a long time sometimes until a member of staff comes' and 'There are only three night staff on duty'.

People told us they were happy and liked living at Eastfield. One person said 'I like it here, I would not like to go anywhere else' and 'All the girls are nice'. Other comments were 'I like to play dominoes every morning with our little group and in the afternoon I like to go on the internet'.

We spoke with relatives and visitors. Comments received were 'The home is very good but the physical environment is not as fancy as some other homes'.

People told us the food was very good and they had a choice of menu with plenty of fresh vegetables. One person said 'I have a cooked breakfast every day'. Another person said 'I have to have gluten free and the cook is really good he buys special bread and other foods. He even bought me gluten free mince pies at Christmas'.