We carried out a review of the data available to us about Eden House on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Eden House, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
There was a comprehensive COVID-19 screening programme in place for all visitors on their arrival. This included vaccination status, temperature checks, hand washing and wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).
The provider’s policies and procedures relating to the management of risks associated with COVID-19 reflected current national guidance which enabled staff to keep people safe. Risk assessments were in place to reduce the risk of infection to people living at the home.
The home appeared clean and well maintained. Staff carried out regular cleaning, including high touch point surfaces. Regular infection control audits had taken place and where required follow up action had been taken. Staff were observed wearing PPE in line with Government guidance.
Careful consideration had been given to protect and promote the mental health and wellbeing of people and staff throughout the pandemic. People and staff were regularly tested for COVID-19 and staff were provided with guidance and training on working safely during the pandemic.
The service had maintained strong links with external health professionals to ensure people continued to receive the care and treatment they needed to maintain and improve their health and wellbeing.
Eden House is a care home providing personal and nursing care to 37 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection.
The care home provides accommodation in an adapted building that includes private rooms and apartments.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People and relatives were happy with the care and support they received and spoke positively about staff and the registered manager. People's care and support needs were met by staff who knew them well and enjoyed working with them.
Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work and there were enough staff available to meet people's needs. Staff received comprehensive training to enable them to carry out their roles effectively. Staff were happy working for the service and felt supported by the registered manager and colleagues. Staff success was recognised and celebrated.
Care records contained extensive, clear information covering all aspects of people's individualised care and support. Risk assessments were comprehensive and information about people was written in a respectful and personalised way.
People and their relatives were involved in the planning and delivery of their care, and regularly asked for feedback which was acted upon when appropriate. Staff were encouraged to be actively involved in service development.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
There was an extensive range of activities available for people and these were well attended and received. People’s spiritual and emotional needs were well met by staff and volunteers. The service had a strong family and community atmosphere.
The service had established links in the local community and worked in partnership with key organisations including local authorities and other agencies to improve the service for people. Staff at the service worked with health and social care professionals to ensure good outcomes for people.
There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service. When there were problems, the registered manager dealt with them appropriately and worked to reduce the likelihood of recurrence.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 25 December 2015).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Eden House is a care home for older people and people who live with dementia, and has been open for one year. The provider is Christadelphian Care Homes. The provider had two homes in Warwickshire which they decided to close when Eden House, a new purpose built care home, opened. Eden House accommodates a maximum of 35 people in the home, and has 18 assisted living apartments. All people who lived in the two homes which closed, were re-located to Eden House.
The home has a registered manager. 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 2014 about how the service is run.
Staff mostly understood safeguarding policies and procedures, and understood how to minimise any identified risks to people’s health and social care.
Medicines were mostly managed safely to ensure people received their prescribed medicines at the right time. Systems were in place to ensure medicines were ordered on time and stored safely in the home.
The provider had sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. The move to Eden House had caused some instability with staff continuity however this had mostly been addressed. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to work well with people who lived at the home. This was due to an effective induction and ongoing staff training. There was a strong volunteer workforce which supported paid staff who worked in the home.
Checks were carried out prior to staff and volunteers starting work at Eden House to ensure their suitability to work with people in the home.
Staff respected and acted upon people’s decisions. Where people did not have capacity to make informed decisions, ‘best interest’ decisions were taken on the person’s behalf. This meant the service was adhering to the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
The provider was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and had followed the advice of the local authority DoLS team. The provider had referred people to the local authority for an assessment when they thought the person’s freedom was restricted.
People enjoyed the meals provided, had good choice of food and sufficient to eat and drink. Their individual nutritional needs were well supported.
Where changes in people’s health were identified, they were referred promptly to other healthcare professionals.
People and visitors to the home were positive about the care provided by staff. During our visit we observed staff being caring to people, and saw a lot of laughter. Staff supported people’s privacy and dignity well.
Group and individualised activities were provided by the Eden House ‘well-being’ team. The team worked with people to ensure all people who lived at the home were provided with activities that met their interests and needs.
People who lived at Eden House, their relatives, and staff, felt able to speak with management and share their views about the service. Complaints were responded to appropriately.
The management team had the confidence of staff. They were seen as open and supportive. The team and staff had gone through a challenging year as a result of moving people and staff from two other care homes. They had supported both through the changes, and were moving into a period of stability.