Edenbridge Manor Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. This is the first assessment for this service following a change of provider name. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

People were treated as individuals and received person centred care from staff who knew them well. People and relatives were encouraged to share their views and relatives felt well informed by the staff and management team, particularly when there were worries or concerns.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People's care plans and risk assessments were personalised for each person and information was kept up to date. Care documentation enabled visitors to engage with people as they reflected people’s individual interests and preferences for communication support. People’s care was person centred and supported by information about what people enjoyed doing with their time and what was important to them. Activities were provided by staff in line with people’s interests. We saw that this happened throughout our site visit. Staff were considerate and respectful of people’s individual needs when they supported them. For example, people in bed were comfortable and staff ensured that they had their favourite music on, or television show and staff interacted with them positively, addressing them by their preferred name. During mealtimes, staff assisted people if they required it, by prompting or by assisting them to eat. There was a relaxed atmosphere and people enjoyed their meals.

People told us, “Good life here,” and “we made a decision to live here and have never regretted it.” A relative said, “Little grumbles but on the whole, care good and always consult me.” Staff told us, “We try to ensure we get it right, peoples’ needs change though but we update care plans so that we follow people’s wishes.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. People told us, “It’s like living at home, I see a doctor, a hairdresser, my feet get done, but I don’t have to organise any of it, the staff do it for me and I prefer it, I don’t have to worry at all, and “I request 24 hour notice reminder for things, a bell or face to face reminders by staff, it helps me” Relatives told us they felt well informed and assured that if needed, specialist advice would be sought straight away. One relative said, “Pretty well on top of things, they let me know of appointments so we can go and if we can’t, a staff member will and then let us know outcome.”

Staff told us that they worked alongside families and always inform families of any appointments and keep a record of the appointment and advice given.

A health professional told us, “Staff are always professional and polite. They know residents well and contact us when needed.” We were also told, “No complaints.”

Care plans were regularly reviewed and contained detailed information about people's care needs, including any health and medical needs. They also included evidence of regular partnership working with health professionals such as specialist nurses, and therapy teams. These records were well documented and showed responsive co-ordinated care. Staff were able to discuss how they ensured people were treated equally and fairly no matter their age, sexuality or their health diagnosis. They told us of their knowledge of the Equality Act and how they used this in supporting people and decision making.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.
People's care plans and risk assessments were personalised for each person and information was kept up to date. Care documentation enabled visitors to engage with people as they reflected people’s individual interests and preferences for communication support. People’s care was person centred and supported by information about what people enjoyed doing with their time and what was important to them. Activities were provided by staff in line with people’s interests. We saw that this happened throughout our site visit. Staff were considerate and respectful of people’s individual needs when they supported them. For example, people in bed were comfortable and staff ensured that they had their favourite music on, or television show and staff interacted with them positively, addressing them by their preferred name. During mealtimes, staff assisted people if they required it, by prompting or by assisting them to eat. There was a relaxed atmosphere and people enjoyed their meals.

People told us, “Good life here,” and “we made a decision to live here and have never regretted it.” A relative said, “Little grumbles but on the whole, care good and always consult me.” Staff told us, “We try to ensure we get it right, peoples’ needs change though but we update care plans so that we follow people’s wishes.”

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.
People told us they were asked for their views and felt listened to. Relative, resident and staff meetings took place and there were opportunities to feedback regularly. Feedback and actions taken were then discussed at the next meeting.

There was a complaints policy and procedure, we saw that concerns raised had been responded to promptly and thoroughly. The management team kept a log that ensured the registered manager had an overview. They told us they had an open-door policy, and we saw people and relatives popping in to speak to the manager to share information and ask questions. Relatives told us, “I feel confident that I can raise anything, and it will be taken seriously.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People and families said there were no barriers to access care and treatment, and they felt it was done in a timely way. One person said, “There have been no problems in attending appointments, I have had flu and covid injections and I had to go to hospital, and it was arranged. I do have trouble walking, I use a frame and also a buggy, the lifts take me up and down and all the corridors are wide enough for me to manoeuvre.” Relatives confirmed that their loved ones attended appointments in the community and hospitals when required.

Staff confirmed that people were able to access care, treatment and support when they needed to. Staff said, “We ring the surgery for advice if we are worried, the nurse visits twice a week as well. It all works well.” One staff member said about the environment, “There is level access everywhere and lifts so everyone can go where they want to, communal areas, reception and bathrooms. The gardens are all safe and they are used during good weather, some people do gardening.”

One health professional told us, “Always professional, polite, genuinely kind to people. They discuss people in non-discriminatory way.” Another health professional said, “They know their residents well and are kind and polite.”

Families and staff confirmed people were able to access care, treatment and support when they needed to. There was evidence within people’s care records that when staff identified a health issue, they acted immediately, and people received treatment and care promptly. Records showed staff had received training in Equality Diversity and they explained how they treated people equally, without discrimination and respected their individual needs, including any religious or cultural needs. People’s care plans contained information about their wishes in relation to how their social, cultural and spiritual needs needed to be met. This included care plans around sexuality, emotional support and daily lifestyle.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People told us, “Always feel at home here, lovely atmosphere and we all treated the same. Relatives told us that their loved ones were included and involved in decision making, and that they (as visitors) feel welcomed and listened to. One relative said, “Always welcomed –feel involved.” Staff told us, “As a team we make sure everybody is treated with respect and that no-one is discriminated against.”

There was evidence of regular review and support from supporting health professionals within peoples' care plans. Staff ensured families were involved in all decisions. There were no restrictions to visiting, families were welcome at any time. There were organisational polices that ensured the provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Staff worked closely with people to make plans about their future care. For example, people and their families were involved in planning how they would like to be cared for at the end of their lives. It was acknowledged that some people found these discussions difficult and so staff gathered information slowly and added important details after hospital admissions. Care plans identified people's preferences at the end of their life and the service co-ordinated palliative care in the care home where this was the person's wish. Care plans contained information and guidance in respect of peoples' religious and resuscitation wishes. People had ReSPECT forms. ReSPECT stands for Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment and ensures their personal wishes are followed. People also had a DNACPR (Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) decision, also known as a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) order,which were accessible to all staff and health professionals should a situation arise. Relatives and friends were supported with compassion through this difficult time. For example, visiting for those people at the end of their lives was extended, with the facility to stay overnight if wanted. DNACPR and ReSPECT forms were discussed with people and families, staff made sure people understood their options and what it meant to request withdrawing care, or not receiving care, to allow them a dignified death.