• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Edendale Care Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

5-6 The Green, St Leonards On Sea, East Sussex, TN38 0SY (01424) 429908

Provided and run by:
Belmont Sandbanks Limited

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

All Inspections

20 April 2017

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on the 20 April 2017and was unannounced. Edendale Care Home is a care home for up to 12 older people that require support and personal care and who live with dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 10 people living in the home. The service is owned by Belmont Sandbanks Limited and is located in St Leonards on Sea, East Sussex. The registration for the service has recently changed from 27 beds to twelve.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good and met all relevant fundamental standards.

Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to raise an alert if they had any concerns. Risk assessments were centred on the needs of the individual. Each risk assessment included clear measures to reduce identified risks and guidance for staff to follow or make sure people were protected from harm. Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored to identify how the risks of recurrence could be reduced.

Medicines were stored, administered, recorded and disposed of safely and correctly. Staff were trained in the safe administration of medicines and kept relevant records that were accurate.

There was a sufficient number of staff deployed to meet people’s needs. Staff received essential training, additional training relevant to people’s individual needs, and regular one to one supervision sessions. Thorough recruitment procedures were in place to ensure staff were of suitable character to carry out their role.

Staff knew each person well and understood how to meet their support and communication needs. Staff communicated effectively with people and treated them with kindness and respect. People were supported to have choice and their independence was promoted by staff who understood the needs of older people and of those living with dementia. Staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible and the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The staff provided meals that were in sufficient quantity and met people’s needs and choices. People told us they enjoyed the food. Staff knew about and provided for people’s dietary preferences and restrictions.

People were promptly referred to health care professionals when needed. Personal records included people’s individual plans of care, life history, likes and dislikes and preferred activities. These records help staff deliver care that met people’s individual needs. The activities provided were suitable for people living with dementia.

The provider and the management team were open and transparent in their approach. They placed emphasis on continuous improvement of the service. There was a system of monitoring checks and audits to identify any improvements that needed to be made. The management team acted on the results of these checks to improve the quality of the service and care.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

20 & 24 August 2015

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on 20 and 24 August 2015. Edendale Care Home was last inspected on 28 January 2014 and no concerns were identified.

Edendale Care Home is a care home for up to 27 older people that require support and personal care and who live with dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 9 people living in the home. The location consists of two houses adjoined by the laundry. As occupancy has been low one of the houses is currently closed and people all live in one house. The service is owned by Belmont Sandbanks Limited and is located in St Leonards on Sea, East Sussex.

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.

Not everyone could tell us of their experiences, but those that could spoke positively of the home and commented they felt safe. Our own observations and the records we looked at reflected the positive comments people made. People had confidence in the staff to support them and we observed positive interactions throughout our inspection.

People were safe. Care plans and risk assessments included people’s assessed level of care needs, action for staff to follow and an outcome to be achieved. Medicines were managed safely in accordance with current regulations and guidance. There were systems in place to ensure that medicines had been stored, administered, audited and reviewed appropriately, including the administration of controlled drugs.

People were happy and relaxed with staff. They said they felt safe and there were sufficient staff to support them. One person told us, “I feel safe here. It’s nice here.”

When staff were recruited, their employment history was checked and references obtained. Checks were also undertaken to ensure new staff were safe to work within the care sector. Staff were knowledgeable and trained in safeguarding and what action they should take if they suspected abuse was taking place. Staff retainment was good and most staff we spoke with had worked at Edendale for many years..

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. We found that the manager understood when an application should be made and how to submit one.

Where people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions the home was guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) to ensure any decisions were made in the person’s best interests.

Accidents and incidents were recorded appropriately and steps taken by the home to minimise the risk of similar events happening in the future. Risks associated with the environment and equipment had been identified and managed. Emergency procedures were in place in the event of fire and people knew what to do, as did the staff.

Staff had received essential training and there were opportunities for additional training specific to the needs of the service, such as diabetes and advanced dementia. Staff had received both one to one and group supervision meetings with their manager, and formal personal development plans, such as annual appraisals were in place.

People were encouraged and supported to eat and drink well. One person said, “I like the food, its nice food.” There was a varied daily choice of meals and people were able to give feedback and have choice in what they ate and drank. People were advised on healthy eating and special dietary requirements were met. People’s weight was monitored, with their permission. Health care was accessible for people and appointments were made for regular check-ups as needed.

People could choose how to spend their day and they took part in activities in the home when they wanted to. Staff told of peoples particular favourites, such as card games. People themselves told us they enjoyed the activities, which included singing, puzzles and films. People were encouraged to stay in touch with their families and receive visitors.

People felt well looked after and supported, and were encouraged to be as independent as possible. We observed friendly and genuine relationships had developed between people and staff. One person told us, “They treat you well here.” One person told us the staff supported them with their hair and make-up and it made them feel ‘good’.

People were encouraged to express their views and completed surveys, and feedback received showed people were satisfied overall, and felt staff were friendly and helpful. People also said they felt listened to and any concerns or issues they raised were addressed. One person said, “If there is anything wrong, I tell the staff.”

Staff were asked for their opinions on the service and whether they were happy in their work. Staff enjoyed their work and felt that they were a family. They felt supported within their roles, describing an ‘open door’ management approach, where management were always available to discuss suggestions and address problems or concerns.

The provider undertook quality assurance reviews to measure and monitor the standard of the service and drive improvement.

28 January 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an inspection to follow up on an outstanding issue with regard to record keeping which we found during our previous inspection of 10 September 2013.

We found that the provider was now compliant. People's records were up to date and accurate and they reflected people's individual needs.

People we spoke with told us they were well looked after.

Staff knew people well and were able to tell us about people's care needs and choices.

10 September 2013

During a routine inspection

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. Due to their dementia type illnesses not all of the people who lived at the home were able to tell us about their experiences. We observed care, spoke to staff and people who were visiting the home.

People who were able to, told us they were happy living at the home and that staff were kind. We observed good interaction between staff and people who lived at the home. One person said 'they're alright here, they look after us.' A visitor to the home told us they were very happy with the care provided and said their relative was well looked after.

We looked at the systems and processes in place for the safe management of medicines and we found that these were appropriate.

We observed staff talking to people. We saw that they gained their consent before undertaking any activity or providing care.

We found that staff knew people well, and the care people received was good. However, not all of the records were fully completed.

There was a complaints procedure in place and available to people who lived at the home.

4 February 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

In this report the name of the registered manager appears as Rachel Daykin. This person was not in post and not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still a registered manager on our register at the time.

People who used the service had complex needs which meant not all the people we spoke with were able to tell us their experiences. However, those we spoke with told us that they were happy living at the home. One person told us they were looking forward to their meal. They told us, 'it's very nice.'

We observed the way staff interacted with people and saw that it was positive. Staff knew people well and they were able to respond to their needs in a kind and positive way.

External professionals that we spoke with told us, 'there are good team dynamics here.'

We saw that the home was clean and tidy throughout and people were protected from the risk of infection.

Staff received training that helped them to meet the needs of the people who lived at the home. Staff we spoke with told us they were well supported by senior staff.

The provider had a system in place to assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive. We saw that this was new and not yet fully embedded into practice.

14 August 2012

During a routine inspection

People who used the service had complex needs which meant not all the people we spoke with were able to tell us their experiences. However, those we spoke with told us that they were able to choose when they got up. People told us about the activities they enjoyed. One person told us about a day centre they attended.

15 November 2011

During a routine inspection

Due to the varying degrees of diminished mental capacity amongst the people we met, only some felt able to engage in conversation.

Three people we spoke with commented positively about the garden and two spoke of the 'lovely flowers'.

Four people confirmed they received visits from family members on a regular basis.

People told us they had access to healthcare Professionals'.

A person who had lived at the home for some years commented that they thought things were better since the change of ownership.

Another person said that they didn't have anything bad to say about the home, staff were nice but they just wanted to go home.

One person said that they would like to go out more than they did to places of interest as they did not know the area at all. They said 'staff are not too bad', if I told them about something I was worried about they would sort it out.