CQC report explained · a nursing home, run by DFB (Care)
Palm Court Nursing Home
17 Prideaux Road, Eastbourne, BN21 2ND
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Palm Court Nursing Home is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safer staffing and a cleaner home, but ongoing problems with care records, person-centred care and oversight.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 10 and 12 July 2023. Inspectors observed care, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care records, medicine records, recruitment files and quality checks.
The home had enough staff, and improvements had been made to cleanliness, infection control, the building and new admissions. Staff generally knew people well, understood safeguarding procedures and supported people to make choices.
However, records were often incomplete or conflicting. Accidents and incidents were not always reported or investigated properly. Activities were limited, some staff did not respond well when people were upset, and relatives had not been involved in care planning. The service remained in breach of Regulations 9, 12 and 17.
The overall rating stayed at Requires Improvement. Safe, Responsive and Well-led were also rated Requires Improvement. Effective and Caring were not reviewed during this visit, so their earlier ratings carried over.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to support people safely, with good staff presence and no delays in answering call bells.
“There were enough staff to support people safely. People did not have to wait for call bells to be answered” from the report
Cleaner environment
The home was cleaner and more hygienic than at the previous inspection. Staff used protective equipment appropriately and recorded cleaning.
“The home was clean and hygienic, and staff recorded areas they had cleaned.” from the report
Health risks understood
Information about supporting people with epilepsy and seizures was clear and specific. Staff knew what to do in an emergency.
“Health risks to people were well managed. For example, where people lived with epilepsy and were prone to seizures, information on how staff should support the person in the event of a seizure was clear and detailed.” from the report
Kind interactions
Although the response to distress was inconsistent, inspectors also saw staff being kind and respectful, including during mealtimes.
“When staff spoke to people, they were kind and respectful.” from the report
Inaccurate care records
seriousDaily records did not reliably show the care people received or what happened during the day. Care plans also contained conflicting information about risks and moving people safely.
“People's daily records did not accurately reflect the care and support they were receiving or events that happened throughout the day.” from the report
Incidents not always reported
seriousAn incident involving three people was found in a handover sheet but had not initially been reported to management, investigated or referred to safeguarding.
“Accidents and incidents had not always been responded to appropriately by staff.” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingPeople spent long periods without interaction or engagement. Relatives said there were not enough activities for their family members.
“People spent long periods of time without interaction or engagement from staff.” from the report
Inconsistent response to distress
needs fixingSome staff did not respond appropriately when people were upset. Care plans did not explain clearly what reassurance or support worked for each person.
“Some staff ignored people and didn't interact with them, other staff repeatedly told a person to sit down when they tried to stand up.” from the report
Weak oversight
seriousAudits had not identified repeated problems with medicine records, care plans and daily recording. Several safeguarding concerns were also reported to the regulator late.
“Governance processes were not always effective in identifying concerns.” from the report
- 01How will you make sure care plans and risk assessments give staff one clear and up-to-date set of instructions?
- 02How are accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns now reported, investigated and notified to CQC?
- 03What activities are now available for people who are often left without interaction?
- 04How will staff be taught and checked on the best way to support each person when they are anxious or distressed?
- 05When will relatives be invited to care reviews and relative meetings?
This was a follow-up focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led; Effective and Caring were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 August 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Palm Court Nursing Home
11 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- August 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2023Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- December 2021Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2019Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2019Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- January 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2017Inadequatestayed InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2016Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- August 2015Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvement
- July 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.
Or stay at home with a private carer
Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.