We carried out a review of the data available to us about Eric Williams 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 Eric Williams House, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People felt safe living at Eric Williams House. Staff knew how to protect and speak up on behalf of people to further safeguard people. People’s identified risks had steps in place which minimised the risk of further harm or injury. There were enough staff to care for people. Staff used gloves and aprons to help reduce the risk of infection. Incidents and accidents had been recorded and reviewed so people were supported if things had happened.
People’s care needs had been assessed, and staff had training and support to provide care based on best practice guidance. People enjoyed their meals and staff knew how to best ensure people had enough to eat and drink. People had access to other health and social care professionals to promote their well-being. The home had been decorated to reflect the needs of people living with dementia. 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.
People enjoyed the company of staff and were happy living at Eric Williams House. People were freely able to tell staff about the care they wanted and made decisions about this. People were supported by staff who promoted people’s independence, choice and privacy. Staff enjoyed their role and were free from judgement or bias.
People’s care had been planned to meet their short and long terms needs and goals. People’s preferences were respected and involved people who mattered to them. People’s communication needs were met and people were supported to have access to things they liked to do. Complaints were welcomed and responded to, with any learning shared across the provider’s locations. People were supported at the end of their lives and staff knew people’s choices and requests.
People’s views and opinions were collated and used to make any requested changes. There were systems and processes in place to monitor people’s care and treatment. People knew the registered manager who demonstrated a clear vision and followed an improvement service plan. Staff also supported planned improvements.
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 requires improvement (published 9 August 2017).
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.
At the last inspection in January 2015, the service was rated good. At this inspection we found the service remained good.
There was a registered manager in post. 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.
Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people from the risk of abuse. Risks to people’s individual health and wellbeing were identified and care was planned to minimise the identified risks. Staff’s suitability for their role was checked before they started working at the home and there was enough staff to support people safely. Medicines were administered and managed safely.
The registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were looked after in a way that did not inappropriately restrict their freedom.
People were cared for by staff who had the skills and training to meet their needs. People’s nutritional needs were assessed and staff made sure people had enough to eat and drink. People had routine health checks and were referred to other healthcare services when their health needs changed.
The registered manager and staff had a good understanding of people’s individual needs and preferences. Care and support was person centred and the atmosphere in the home was friendly and homely. Staff promoted people’s independence and respected their privacy and dignity. People were encouraged to maintain relationships that were important to them.
People and relatives knew the registered manager and other members of the management team well and were confident any concerns or issues they raised would be dealt with promptly. People and their relatives were encouraged to share their opinions about the service. The management team checked the quality of the service people received and implemented improvements.
The registered manager and the management team were passionate about providing person centred dementia care. The home was very well led by the registered manager who provided excellent leadership. They inspired staff by leading by example to provide a quality dementia care service.
This inspection took place on 8 January 2015 and was unannounced.
Eric Williams House is registered to provide accommodation for up to 43 people who require personal care. The home provides a service for older people with dementia care needs. Eric Williams House is divided into four units, one providing a short stay service. Each unit contains a lounge, dining area and a kitchenette.
At the time of this inspection there were 38 people living at the home.
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 about how the service is run.
People who used the service, relatives and staff told us people were safe and there were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm. These included a risk management process, thorough staff recruitment procedure and an effective procedure for managing people’s medications. Staff understood their responsibilities around keeping people safe but not all staff understood what constituted abuse. This could result in people not being protected from the risk of harm or poor practice.
Staff understood about consent and respected decisions people made about their daily lives. The registered manager understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff said they had completed training in the MCA but three of the staff we spoke with had little understanding of the MCA. This could result in people’s rights to make certain decisions not being protected.
People told us staff were kind and caring. Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity when providing care and there were enough suitably trained staff to meet people’s individual care needs. Staff said they had completed the required training to work with people safely although we found some staff training needed updating.
People were treated as individuals and were encouraged to make choices about their care. People told us they were listened to and were confident they could raise any concerns with staff and the registered manager. People told us their relatives and friends could visit them at any time and there were processes in place for people to express their views and opinions about the home. People had enough to eat and drink during the day and their healthcare needs were monitored and referrals made to appropriate healthcare professionals when required.
Staff had up to date information about people’s care in an ‘At a Glance’ document. These documents were kept with individual care plans and were easily accessible to staff. People’s care records contained individualised information about how people liked to receive their care, for example people’s preferences and choices. However, some of the care plans did not provide staff with consistent information about people’s care as plans had not always been reviewed when people’s needs had changed.
People told us they were happy with their care and had no complaints about the service they received. People who lived at the home, relatives and staff said the home was well managed. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service through feedback from people who used the service, their relatives, staff meetings and a programme of audits.
We spoke with seven people living at the home, and five relatives visiting on the day of our inspection. We spoke with the manager, deputy manager and eight staff on duty during the day. People living at the home told us,
The staff, 'Were wonderful ' they're lovely to me.'
They 'Liked this place' and the staff were, 'All good.'
Relatives told us,
I have, 'Never seen anything remotely, at any stage that you could interpret as poor care'.
The service is 'Always excellent.'
We saw staff provided kind and compassionate support to people living at Eric Williams House. They understood the needs of each person and how dementia impacted on the person's understanding and behaviour.
We saw staff had received formal training in dementia care. They were led by a manager and deputy manager with a wealth of experience and knowledge of how to support people with dementia.
Eight people left comments on our comment cards. They were all very positive about the service provided to people with dementia. A typical comment was, 'I cannot praise them enough.'
We saw people with dementia were engaged in different individual and group activities which held their interest and which they appeared to enjoy.
We saw people with dementia had good access to health care professionals such as their GP, district nurses, and speech and language therapists.
We looked at care records of people with dementia. We saw there were systems for reviewing and updating care plans and risk assessments which protected people.
We saw the environment was in the process of being improved to support people with dementia. We saw that whilst this meant some people living at Eric Williams had to move to use a different lounge during the day, the disruption caused minimal anxiety to those affected.
We saw staff treated people with dignity and respect. Staff spent time talking with and responding to people in a quiet, unhurried way. Staff had a good understanding of the needs of people. There was a friendly, calm, relaxed atmosphere in the home throughout our visit.
People told us they liked living at Eric Williams House. One person said, 'It's nice, it will do till I go home." A relative told us, 'I am more than happy with the care here. It is such a relief to know that X is looked after so well, I never have to worry about her when I leave.'
People told us they were satisfied with the cleanliness in the home. One person said, 'There's always cleaners around, they tidy my room and make my bed every day.' A relative told us, 'The home is always warm, clean and tidy, it doesn't smell either.'
All the people we spoke with said they would speak to someone if they were unhappy about anything. Relatives we spoke with were aware of the complaints procedure.
People we spoke to were happy with the care they receive at Eric Williams House. Comments from people included 'It's a nice place to stay and the staff are lovely'.
A relative we spoke to told us 'I visit everyday, X is no longer able to speak, staff know her very well and understand how she communicates using eye contact'.
Relatives told us, 'The food is lovely if I'm here at meal times they always offer me dinner, and when I do stay its really tasty'.
'The food is excellent, good plain food, well presented and plenty of it'.
During our visit several healthcare professionals visited the home including a GP, and two community nurses. One nurse told us, 'I have no concerns whatsoever about Eric Williams House, we work well together and anything I ask staff to do is carried out quickly'
Three relatives told us they were able to raise concerns, and would be confident these would be listened to and acted on.
People who use the service did not give us any information about cleanliness and infection control. Relatives we spoke to told us the home is always clean when they visit.
People were unable to tell us if they are happy with the way they receive there medication, however we observed medication being given and people receive their medication as prescribed
Staff told us that all the equipment that people needed was available in the home.
People who live at the home were unable to tell us their views on the staff but during our visit we saw staff and residents getting along well together, and people who were visiting spoke positively about the staff at the home.
A relative also told us 'There always seems enough staff when I visit. It's important that mum has carers she knows and all the staff here have a good understanding of people's needs''.
We observed staff interacting and communicating with people. The interactions were unhurried, friendly, professional and relaxed. The interactions observed demonstrate that staff understood people's needs.
People who live in the home were unable to tell us if they are asked for their opinions of the care provided, but we saw comment cards that had been completed by residents that indicated they were happy with the care provided. Relatives said they had been asked for their views of the home, are invited to a relatives meeting and are involved in reviews.
Relatives we spoke to during our visit told us they would speak to one of the senior staff, or the managers if they were unhappy about anything. One relative said when her mother first moved into the home she had a few issues that she raised with the manager and these were quickly sorted out. She said that nothing is too much trouble for staff.