You are here

Eversleigh Care Centre Requires improvement

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 23 May 2017

This inspection was unannounced and took place on 6 February 2017. At the last inspection in February 2016, we found the provider was not meeting the regulations in relation to the safe management of medicines, the overall rating was ‘requires improvement.’ Following the inspection the provider sent us an action plan of what they would do to meet legal requirements of regulation 12, of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. At this inspection we found the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation. However, we identified a new breach of the regulations and improvements to governance, staffing arrangements and how people received care that was personalised to their needs were required.

Eversleigh Care Centre is registered to provide accommodation with nursing and personal care for up to 84 people including older people, people living with dementia and people with physical disabilities. The home caters for people who require, residential, nursing and respite care. The home is divided into three units, Garden’s House, West Park and Robinswood. On the day of the inspection there were 68 people living at the home.

Although there was no registered manager in post a new manager had been recruited in October 2016 and they advised us they planned to submit an application to become the registered manager once they had completed their probationary employment period. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

We found there were not always sufficient numbers of staff available to respond to people’s care and support needs in a timely way. People told us they felt safe, but staff were not always able to respond promptly to requests for support. People received their medicines as prescribed and systems used to manage and monitor the administration of medicines were safe. Risks were assessed and managed and any changes to people’s risks were shared with the staff team. The provider carried out pre-employment checks to ensure staff were safe to work with people.

People did not always receive the required support at meal times to enable them to make choices or enjoy their food. People felt that staff had the skills and knowledge to meet their care and support needs. Staff received induction and training which was relevant to their role. People were asked for their consent before care was provided and where people’s rights were restricted this had been done lawfully within the boundaries of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). People were supported to access healthcare professionals when required.

People told us they received support from staff who were kind, but who did not always take time to engage with them. Some staff were focused on support tasks rather than people. Most people we spoke with felt they were involved in day to day decisions about their care and people and relatives told us staff provided dignified support which protected people’s privacy.

People told us there were not enough leisure opportunities and activities which supported people’s hobbies and interests were not widely available. People and relatives felt they had been involved in the assessment and planning of their care and knew how to complain if they were unhappy about any aspect of their care and support.

Recent management changes meant the home had been without a registered manager since April 2015. Although systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided some areas requiring improvement identified at our last inspection had not been addressed. In particular the deployment of staffing at mealtimes. People expressed mixed views about the care they received at the home. People and their relatives had been invited to give feedback about the home. People, staff and relatives felt the new manager was approachable and supportive. The provider had notified us of events and incidents as required by law.

During this inspection we found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 23 May 2017

The service was not always safe.

There were not always enough staff available to respond to people’s care and support needs. People received their medicines as prescribed. People were protected from the risk of potential abuse because staff knew how to recognise and report potential abuse. Risks were managed to ensure people were supported safely.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 23 May 2017

The service was not always effective.

People were not always supported in a timely manner to eat their meals. People received care and support from staff who were skilled and who received regular supervision from the manager. People were asked for their consent before care and support was provided. People were supported by staff to access relevant healthcare services when needed.

Caring

Requires improvement

Updated 23 May 2017

The service was not always caring.

People received support from staff who they described as kind, but did not always have time to spend with them. People were involved in day to day decisions about their care. People’s privacy and dignity was respected by staff.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 23 May 2017

The service was not always responsive.

People did not have access to activities and hobbies that interested them. People and their relatives were involved in the planning of their care and staff knew people’s individual preferences. People and relatives knew how to raise concerns about the care they received and there was a system in place to manage complaints.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 23 May 2017

The service was not always well-led.

Although some improvements had been made since the last inspection further improvements were still required. People could not be confident they would receive an effective service because the provider’s governance systems did not always assess, monitor or improve the service delivery. The provider did not have a registered manager in post. However, people were given the opportunity to tell the provider about their experience of using the service.