• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Emberbrook Care Home

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

16 Raphael Drive, Thames Ditton, Surrey, KT7 0BL (020) 8398 3300

Provided and run by:
Four Seasons (No 10) Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

To Be Confirmed

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on the 23 June 2015 and was unannounced.

Emberbrook Care Home is a nursing home that is registered to provide accommodation for up to 68 people who may require nursing or personal care. Some people who reside in the home may be living with dementia. The service has four units arranged over two floors and each person has their own bathroom. On the day of our inspection there were 55 people living in the service.

There was a new manager in post who had started working at the service in May 2015. They were in the process of applying to be 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 living with dementia did not always have a positive experience at mealtimes and equipment that would help them to eat independently was not always available. Staff did not always interact with people at mealtimes. Staff did not have a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) or the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Relatives we spoke to told us that staff were “Not trained enough in dementia” and we found that not all staff had received supervision with their line manager that would have enabled them to raise concerns or identify any training needs they may have. We have made a recommendation that staff receive additional and relevant training related to caring for people living with dementia.

People did not have access to activities that were personalised to them. People told us they were “Bored” and that the staff did not always have time to spend time with them. Relatives confirmed that activities were something that needed to be improved. Peoples care plans were not person-centred and there was limited information in them about people’s life and history.

Where people had identified risks to their health these were not always managed well, particularly in relation to their skin. Staff did not always recognise the signs where people were at risk of developing pressure sores. We have made a recommendation relating to this aspect of people’s care.

Staff did not always have a clear understanding of who they should contact if they wished to raise a safeguarding concern outside the service such as the local authority.

People told us that they felt safe living at Emberbrook Care Home and that the staff were “Vigilant”. Relatives told us that there were enough staff available to keep their family member safe. Recruitment processes were robust and had been followed to help ensure that suitable staff were employed. People got their medicines on time or when they needed them. Medicines were stored securely and administered by staff who were trained to do so. Records relating to medicines were accurate.

People told us that the staff knew them “Well”. People were referred for specialist advice if they had a particular health need that had been identified. Referrals were made in a timely way and healthcare professionals we spoke to told us that they had “No concerns” about the care that was provided.

Without exception people and their relatives told us that staff were caring. Comments included that staff were “Excellent”, “Wonderful” and that they “Always put you first”. Interactions between people and staff were respectful and people’s dignity and privacy was maintained by staff who understood the importance of doing so. The atmosphere in the service was welcoming and relaxed.

People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint and were “Not afraid” to do so. Complaints were dealt with informally wherever possible and had been resolved to people’s satisfaction. Complaints were clearly documented and acted upon by the manager. Staff responded promptly to people when they needed assistance and when a health need was identified this was acted upon quickly by nursing and care staff to improve their health.

The new manager understood the challenges the service faced to improve the delivery of care and was actively involved in the planned refurbishment. There were effective quality audits undertaken where action was taken to improve the service for people. Incidents and accidents were monitored to identify any patterns or trends. People and relatives told us they were pleased with the new manager and said “Things were looking up”.

We found two of 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 this report.

31 January 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This was a follow up visit to check that the standards of cleanliness around the home had improved. During this visit we walked around the home and found it to be clean and tidy.

We spoke to three members of staff who told us that new systems had been put in place to improve the monitoring of cleanliness. They also told us that a new Head Housekeeper had been employed. One staff member told us "They come around all the time and check our work."

We spoke to two people who lived at the home who told us that they thought the home was very clean. One person told us that there were "Wonderful staff who keep it clean."

22 October 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke with four people who used the service and one visitor. We spoke with a social worker who was visiting that day and we spoke with seven staff as well as the registered manager. We carried out a SOFI (short observational framework) observation at lunchtime to see how staff interacted with people.

People told us that staff asked for consent before providing any care or treatment. For example, one person told us 'Staff always ask if I'm ready to have my shower when I get up.'

People said they were very happy with their care and told us that staff were 'Very caring' and 'I can't fault them.'

We asked people what they thought about the cleanliness in the home and they told us they had no concerns. However, during our inspection we identified some areas of concern.

People told us they thought that the staff were well trained to do their job. One person told us 'I don't think they could be any better.' We looked at staff training and supervision records and saw that all staff received up to date training and support.

We saw that the provider had systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the care and treatment they provided, and had achieved an external quality rating.

29 March 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke to three people who live at the home and to the family members of one person living at the home. We had discussions with the manager and spoke to two staff about the care of people.

During the lunchtime we used our SOFI (Short Observational Framework for Inspection) tool to help us see what people's experiences at mealtimes were. The SOFI tool allows us to spend time watching what is going on in a service and helps us to record how people spend their time and whether they have positive experiences. This includes looking at the support that is given to them by the staff. We spent 35 minutes observing at lunchtime and found that people had positive experiences. Staff were observed assisting people in a calm, friendly and polite manner. People were given choices about the food they would like to eat.

People and their relatives said the home provided a good standard of care. People said they were consulted about their care. We saw records that people had agreed to their care plans. Relatives and people said there were a range a range of activities for people to attend.

People and the home's staff told us there were generally enough staff on duty to meet people's needs.

We saw the home carried out recruitment checks on newly appointed staff.

People said they felt able to raise any concerns they might have. The home facilitated residents' and relatives' meetings so that people and their representatives could express their views about the home.

4 October 2011

During a routine inspection

People who use the service told us they were always about their care and treatment. They had knowledge of their care plans and staff had consulted with them when they were written. The people who use the service said they felt safe at the home and staff were really kind and always available when you needed them.