The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: European Lifestyles (C) - 98 Pembroke Road

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

98 Pembroke Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex, EN1 4EY (020) 8364 7427

Provided and run by:
Embrace Lifestyles (C) Limited

All Inspections

22 and 23 October 2014

During a routine inspection

We undertook an unannounced inspection on 22 and 23 October 2014 of European Lifestyles (C), 98 Pembroke Road. The inspection was carried out by one inspector. This care home provides support to five people with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection five people were using the service.

At our last inspection on 17 October 2013 the service met the regulations inspected. The service had a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.

On the days of the inspection there was a calm and relaxed atmosphere in the home and we saw staff interacted with people in a friendly and respectful manner. We saw that people who used the service appeared very comfortable and relaxed around staff and with the registered manager.

The majority of people at the home were unable to verbally express their views. We saw staff communicate with them in other ways such as using specific body language, gestures, facial expressions and key words. People appeared comfortable with the staff who supported them.

Staff had received training in how to recognise and report abuse. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable in recognising signs of abuse and the associated reporting procedures. Medicines were securely stored and administered.

Assessments were undertaken to identify people’s health and support needs and any risks to people who used the service and others. Care plans were in place to reduce the risks identified.

Where people using the service lacked capacity to understand certain decisions related to their care and treatment, best interests meetings were held which involved family members, independent mental capacity advocates, and social workers.

Staff had the skills and knowledge to support people who used the service. There were enough staff available at the service and staffing levels were determined according to people’s individual needs.

The registered manager at the home was familiar with all of the people living there and staff we spoke with told us they felt supported by the management team. Regular staff meetings were held by the service.

17 October 2013

During a routine inspection

Because people at the home were not always able to communicate verbally with us, we spent time observing interactions between staff and people using the service to see what effect those interactions had on people's well being. We were also able to talk with all people's relatives, over the phone, after the inspection.

Staff we spoke with understood the importance of obtaining the consent of the person before any care or treatment took place. Relatives we spoke with were positive about the care and treatment provided at the home and confirmed that they were included in any decisions about people's care and support.

Staff understood the ways people expressed their needs and were able to communicate with people effectively. We saw that the way staff were interacting with people had a positive effect on their well-being.

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

Relatives we spoke with were positive about the staff. One relative commented 'they are very kind.' Staff told us they felt supported by the management and that there were good training opportunities available within the organisation.

Most relatives told us they had no complaints about the service. Staff explained to us how they would assist someone to raise a concern or make a complaint. We saw that the complaints procedure, in pictorial format, was on display in the dining room.

26 February 2013

During a routine inspection

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service, because people had complex needs which meant they were not always able to tell us their experiences. We spoke to the relatives of 3 people, who told us that staff were kind and respected their relative's privacy.

Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the needs of the people they supported as well as the potential risks associated with each individual. Throughout the inspection we observed staff supporting people in a way that met their needs and protected their rights.

Relatives told us they had no concerns or complaints about the service but would talk to the manager if they needed to. They confirmed that the manager was 'open' and took any concerns seriously.

Effective recruitment and selection processes where in place and appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work. Relatives we spoke with were positive about the staff at the home. They told us that staff were approachable and responded to their suggestions and requests. We observed staff treating people with kindness and in a relaxed and unhurried manner.

Relatives confirmed that the management and staff asked them how things were going and if they were happy with the care and support provided at the home. We saw that the manager carried out regular checks at the home including health and safety audits to make sure people were being supported in a safe environment.

29 March 2011

During a routine inspection

Not everyone in the home can communicate verbally so we spent time observing people who use the service to see what effect the environment and staff interactions had on peoples' wellbeing.

We could see that staff were involving people in decisions about their care and respecting these decisions.

Staff were supporting people in a kind and respectful manner. We spoke with relatives of people who use the service. They confirmed that they where involved in the person's care and had been given information about the service. There is a weekly relatives' evening where people can discuss any issues with the manager and staff.

We saw that people are able to be part of the local community and relatives confirmed that staff support people to go out of the home on a regular basis.

We observed staff asking people if they wanted help with their care and we saw that their decisions were being respected. Staff were also aware of how people were reacting to offers of support and care through observing their body language.

Relatives we spoke with told us they were very happy with the care provided by the service. A relative commented, 'It's like a home from home'. Another relative told us the care provided by the home was, 'The next best thing', to being cared for at home.

People confirmed that regular reviews of care take place with the service and other stakeholders.

Relative we spoke with told us the food was good and the quality and quantity was sufficient. One relative commented, 'He has nice food'. They said the breakfasts were nice and people had a cooked breakfast on a Saturday.

Relatives said that staff take people to health care appointments when needed. They told us that they would often attend appointments with their relative and said they felt involved in this process. A relative commented, 'I go along on hospital visits'.

Relatives said the staff were very kind and that they had no concerns about peoples' safety at the home.

Relatives we spoke with told us the home was always clean. They said they saw staff wearing appropriate aprons when preparing food and washing their hands.

Relatives confirmed that they had been involved in decorating and furnishing peoples' rooms.

People were moving around the home freely and communal areas were comfortable and lively.

Staff were observed using equipment with people in a safe manner and with regard to the persons wellbeing and comfort.

Relatives we spoke with told us they were happy with the staff at the home. A relative commented that the staff were, 'Brilliant'.

Not all relatives we spoke with were satisfied with the staffing levels at the home. People said that staff work very hard and do a good job, however there are times when more staff are needed.

Relatives we spoke with said the manager and staff were approachable and friendly. A relative commented, 'I have no problems with the care at all'.

Relatives we spoke with said the service regularly asks them to comment on the quality of service provision both in reviews and through yearly questionnaires. Relatives confirmed that the manager was approachable and listened to their comments about care provision.

Relatives told us that they had no complaints about the service but knew about the home's complaints policy and procedure. One person commented, 'I've never had anything to complain about'.

Relatives told us that they went through the care plan during reviews with the home and the social worker. One person commented, 'I know I can look at care plans'.