Archived: Edge Hill Rest Home

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on speaking with the registered manager of the service and from looking at records.

Is the service well led?

We found the service to be well led. The service had a manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission and they were supported by a skilled and experienced deputy manager.

The registered manager was responsible for the introduction, development and monitoring of best practice in the service.

This summary is based on a visit to Edge Hill care home where we spoke with the team leader and the provider (owner), and observed staff interactions with people using the service. We looked at records and talked with five people using the service. We spoke with six family members who were visiting and a visiting healthcare professional. We spoke with two further healthcare professionals following our visit to the home. The manager was on holiday at the time of our visit. The manager had recently applied to the Care Quality Commission and had been successful in becoming the registered manager for the service.

Is the service safe?

When we spoke with people living in the home and some of their families they told us that they felt the staff provided care and support in a positive way. During our observations we saw staff approach people in a caring way and when we spoke to them they had a good knowledge and understanding of people's individual care needs.

Families we spoke with told us they felt their 'loved ones' were safe at Edgehill and that they could go away confident that their needs were being met.

Is the service effective?

We saw that there was a care needs assessment in place for each person living in the home. We saw that where people needed any additional support the service arranged consultation with the relevant healthcare professionals such as general practitioners and nursing services which were part of the mental health care services. When we spoke with healthcare professionals they told us that the service made appropriate referrals but that the home did not use appropriate referrals systems and this indicated the service was re-active regarding referring people in a timely way rather than planned care and treatment.

People's care plans were person centred and focused on how the individual wanted to receive their care and support but they didn't always contain all the information on events that had occurred that may impact on care provision. This meant that staff did not always have access to current updates on care needs and this may compromise the care people received.

Is the service caring?

During our visit people living in the home expressed satisfaction about the care and support they received from staff. People spoke well of the caring approach and the well trained staff team.

Comments included:

'The staff do their very best, they are very caring.'

'I like it here, the staff are thoughtful and caring, but sometimes they take their time because there are so many other people who need help.'

Is the service responsive?

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of service that people received.

We saw records that demonstrated that the staff team responded to people and made referrals to the appropriate healthcare professionals.

Is the service well led?

The service had a manager in post who had recently registered with the Care Quality Commission. Staff and visitors spoke well of the manager and one family told us that the manager had listened to her concerns and addressed the issues that they had raised with her.

Whilst looking at the Statement of Purpose (this is a document that provides people with information about what they can expect to receive from the service) we noted that many details were out of date including information about the new manager. Also information about emergency admissions and availability of staff escorts for this eventuality were vague and did not provide people with enough information so that they could make an informed choice about their preferred arrangements in relation to costs in the eventuality of an emergency admission to hospital. The team leader and the provider made a note of this during the inspection visit and told us that this document would be updated.

The provider had arranged refresher training on safeguarding vulnerable adults for staff. Their company policy had been updated to include greater explanation of the action expected of staff and new systems had been introduced to support staff in dealing with allegations of abuse.

The provider had made a number of changes to the way in which medicines were handled in the home. Arrangements were in place to manage medicines safely and effectively. The records we viewed had been fully completed.

We found that the provider had effective systems in place to identify, assess and manage risks to health, safety and welfare of people who used the service. A number of changes had been made since our last inspection on 29 April 2013. The provider had arranged training for staff on completion of records.

People living at the home told us they were happy with the care they received. People were asked for their consent before they received care. All the care plans had been re-written since our last inspection. They were regularly updated and reflected peoples' individual needs.

One person we spoke with said 'the food is quite good and there is lots of it'. People had a choice of menu. Individual dietary and nutritional needs, and preferences, were noted and provided for. Drinks were served regularly throughout the day.

Medicines were not managed safely and effectively. Medication administration records were not always correctly completed.

The Manager had not followed the local authority safeguarding procedures in response to an allegation of abuse and had failed to refer the matter to the safeguarding adults team.

Recruitment procedures were in place to assess whether staff were fit, appropriately qualified and able to do their job. Staff were supported in carrying out their role.

The provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of service provision. We found these were not always implemented effectively to identify, assess and manage risks.

There was an effective complaints system available.