You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

This inspection was carried out on 3 May 2017.

Elmfield House is registered to provide accommodation with personal care for up to 18 people. At the time of our inspection there were 18 people living at the service, some of whom were living with dementia.

At the last inspection in July 2016, the service was rated Good, however, we found the service was in breach of Regulation 5 of the Registration Regulations 2009 (Schedule 1) Registered manager condition. The service did not have a registered manager for the provision of the regulated activity at the location. During this inspection we found the provider has met this Regulation.

The registered manager had registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) for the regulated activity undertaken at the location.

Staff and the provider undertook quality assurance audits to ensure the care provided was of a standard people should expect. Any areas identified as needing improvement were attended to by staff.

People, relatives and associated professionals had been asked for their views about the care provided and how the home was run. Regular resident and relatives and staff meetings took place.

Records of accidents and incidents were maintained at the service and the registered manager undertook monthly audits to identify any trends and took action as required to maintain the safety of people.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 10 September 2016

The service was safe.

Staff were aware of the signs of abuse and the process to be followed if they suspected abuse.

There were enough staff deployed to meet people’s needs.

The provider had carried out appropriate checks to ensure staff were safe to work at the service.

People’s medicines were managed safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 10 September 2016

The service was effective.

Staff received appropriate training and had opportunities to meet with their line manager regularly.

Where people’s liberty was restricted or they were unable to make decisions for themselves, staff had followed legal guidance.

People had involvement from external healthcare professionals as well as staff to support them to remain healthy.

Caring

Good

Updated 10 September 2016

The service was caring.

People told us they were looked after by caring staff.

People’s care and support was delivered in line with their care plans.

People’s privacy and dignity was respected. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they cared for and were aware of people’s individual needs.

Responsive

Good

Updated 10 September 2016

The service was responsive to people's needs.

When people’s needs changed, staff responded to ensure they received the appropriate level of support.

People had opportunities to take part in activities that interested them.

Information about how to make a complaint was available for people and their relatives.

Well-led

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

The service was well led.

There was a registered manager in post and a staff structure where everyone was aware of their roles.

Quality assurance checks were completed to help ensure the care provided was of good quality.

There was a system in place to ascertain the views of people about the care and support they received from the service.

Staff felt supported by the registered manager who had an open door policy.