The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Elsden House

49-51 Elsden Road, Tottenham, London, N17 6RY (020) 8801 4264

Provided and run by:
Wimborne House Limited

All Inspections

10 October 2013

During a routine inspection

We had inspected this provider on 1 May 2013, when we noted some issues which had a moderate impact on people using the service. The provider had not ensured that individual goals were identified and that people were provided with sufficient opportunities to engage in activities. The provider did not identify staff training needs and staff were not supported in their job.

We asked the provider to take steps to comply with Regulations 9 and 23 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010.

We made a further visit on 10 October 2013 to check on the action the provider had taken to meet the requirements of the regulations. We found that the provider had made some improvements to ensure people who use services were offered opportunities to engage in activities. However, we noted that the provider still did not ensure that individual goals were identified. This meant that the provider did not take account of people's social and emotional needs in order to promote their wellbeing and enable them to make choices concerning their lifestyle.

We noted that staff had access to some training, supervision and had appraisals. However, the provider had only begun introducing the system, so not all staff had been appraised or supervised. We judged that it was too early to establish if the provider is able to maintain these improvements and that staff were properly supported.

1 May 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke to four of the people living at the home. They were generally positive about the home. The following are examples of some of the comments we received:

'Yeah, it is okay.'

'It is good. They leave you alone. I am happy.'

'It is okay here.'

We found that people's privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

People had not experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. The provider did not have a plan to ensure that all people using the service were engaged in individual activity programmes.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.

People were cared for by staff who were not supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. The provider did not have a system for ensuring all staff undertook annual appraisals and regular supervisions. Individual training needs for staff were not being identified.

The provider had a system to assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive. However, we did not see recorded evidence of these having been undertaken.

28 September 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

When we visited the home we spoke to two of the people who live there. They told us the home was 'okay' and that 'not much had changed' since we last visited.

One person told us that he had a lot to eat at breakfast. He told us that he cooked his breakfast and was supported by staff to do this.

When we visited the home a member of staff was escorting one person who lives at the home to an external appointment. Two people were out in the community. We saw some people who live at the home were gardening, with support from staff.

We also observed staff supporting a person using the service taking their medication in an appropriate manner.

The home was clean on the day we visited.

30 April 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke to four people who were using the service at Elsden House. They told us that the staff treated them with respect and were polite. People had enough privacy. They felt safe at the home and one person said that any problems were quickly resolved. People were positive about the home overall. Comments included:

"It's a nice home. I've been here years. It is all right. The staff are all right."

"They come to help me out."

"It's OK. It's not too bad. It's not ideal but I used to be homeless so I'm not going to argue."

Since our last inspection, the provider had set up a new gardening project for people using its services. One person was taking part and one person thought they might do so in future. The manager was also encouraging people to consider taking part in other structured activities such as attending local day centre services.

We did not observe a mealtime during our visit but people told us they were happy with the food. People had access to fresh fruit every day and were able to select alternatives to the planned meals if they wanted something different. One person said: "Yes I can choose. There's a freezer. I can take what I want out of it."

The provider had recently redecorated people's rooms and some areas of the home. We saw two people's rooms which were personalised. One person said he was pleased with the new colour: 'I liked it blue. I'm glad they did it blue.' We saw evidence that people had been involved in decisions about their rooms.

All the people using the service we spoke with were aware that smoking was not allowed inside the home. They said staff took this more seriously now.

We found that staffing levels had improved at the home but we were concerned that the staffing levels at night were insufficient to safeguard people using the service and staff.

The provider had mechanisms to monitor the quality of care and involve people using the service.

10 October 2011

During a routine inspection

People in the home told us the home was "O.K" and that staff were "Alright." People we spoke to told us that staff helped them when they needed support. Whilst people using the service made limited comments, we could see that staff were generally supportive of people, however we found some shortfalls that could affect how people experience the service.