We carried out a review of the data available to us about Eglington 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 Eglington, you can give feedback on this service.
At our last inspection on 9 December 2015 the home was rated Good overall. At this inspection on 24 and 29 January 2018 the home continues to be rated Good in all key question areas, therefore the overall rating of the service remained Good. The home demonstrated they continued to meet the regulations and fundamental standards.
The registered provider managed the home and had recently applied to the Commission to become the registered manager as well. 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 about how the service is run.
People told us they felt safe living at the home. The provider had safeguarding policies and procedures in place and staff knew of their responsibility to protect people in their care from abuse. Risk to people had been assessed, identified with appropriate management plans which included potential triggers that staff should be aware of and the steps they should take to manage risks safely. There were procedures in place to deal with emergencies and staff knew of actions to take in the event of a fire or medical emergency.
There were safe recruitment practices in place and staff that supported people were checked and vetted to ensure they could work in social care. People told us that there were enough staff available to support them. Medicines were stored securely, administered and recorded appropriately. People’s medicines were reviewed regularly to ensure they were effective and supporting their recovery. There were infection control policies and procedures in place and staff were responsible for cleaning and disinfecting the home.
Before people began using the service, they were assessed to ensure their needs could be met. Staff were supported through induction, training, supervision and appraisals and felt well supported in their role. People were supported to prepare meals for themselves and others to promote their independence. The provider worked with other health and social care professions to ensure people received safe care and treatment for their recovery. People had access to a range of health care services when they needed them. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People said staff were kind and compassionate towards them. People were involved in making decisions regarding their care and support needs and people’s views were taken into consideration when planning their care. Monthly residents meetings gave people the opportunity to discuss and be involved in making decisions on how the home was run.
Staff understood the importance of supporting people under the Equality Act; therefore people’s individual diversities and cultural backgrounds were respected. People’s privacy and dignity were respected and staff knocked on people’s doors before entering their rooms. Information about people was kept confidential and people’s independence was promoted to support their recovery.
People told us the service was responsive to their individual needs. People had a care plan which was developed based on their assessed needs and staff understood people’s needs and the support to provide. People’s care files included both their personal and medical histories so that staff were aware. People achieved positive outcomes whilst using the service and their physical, mental and social health had improved. People confirmed to us the progress they had made. People’s achievements were celebrated to encourage and motivate them and others using living at the home.
People were encouraged to be involved in various activities that could stimulate their recovery. Some people were supported to gain voluntary employments whilst others pursue courses to improve their skills. People were supported to maintain relationships with their family and friends and this was included in their weekly planner to enable them achieve these goals for their recovery. The provider had a complaint policy and acted in line with their policy when people had a complaint or comment.
Both people and staff told us they felt the service was well managed. The registered provider was passionate about the progress people had made whilst living at the home. People and staff views were sought through annual surveys, residents meeting and/or one-to-one sessions to improve the quality of the service. There were systems in place such as audits used to monitor the quality of the service and the service continuously learned and improved to ensure sustainability.
This inspection took place on 9 November 2015 and was unannounced. This was the first inspection at the home.
Eglington provides accommodation and personal care for up to six people with mental health needs. On the day of the inspection there were 5 people using the service.
There was a registered manager in place. 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 about how the service is run.
People told us they felt safe and staff treated them well. People were involved in their care planning where possible. Medicines had been managed appropriately. Equipment had been serviced on a regular basis to ensure that it remained suitable for use. Care plans were reflective of people’s individual care and preferences. People’s cultural needs and religious beliefs were recorded to ensure that staff took account of people’s needs and wishes.
Care plans and risk assessments provided clear information and guidance for staff on how to support people using the service with their needs. Care plans were reflective of people’s individual care and preferences. People’s cultural needs and religious beliefs were recorded to ensure that staff took account of people’s needs and wishes. People had access to a range of healthcare professionals when required. People were supported to have a healthy and balanced diet.
The manager and staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible. For example to brush their hair or put their laundry away.
Staff had undertaken mandatory training which included safeguarding, mental capacity, health and safety and medicines administration.
Safeguarding adult’s procedures were robust and staff understood how to safeguard people they supported. There was a whistle-blowing procedure available and staff said they would use it if they needed to. Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work and there were enough staff on duty and deployed throughout the home to meet people’s care and support needs.
Staff treated people with empathy and compassion; while respecting their privacy and dignity. Each person had key worker assigned to them to give individual and focused support. Staff knew people well and remembered things that were important to them so that they received person-centred care.
People told us that both the registered manager and the provider were always available and could approach them at any time. Systems were place to monitor and evaluate the quality and safety of the service. However, these were not always used effectively to ensure staff had received up to date refresher training.