We carried out a review of the data available to us about Eden 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 Eden House, you can give feedback on this service.
Eden House is a care home providing personal care to people with a learning disability and autistic people. The service accommodates 3 people on a permanent basis and has 2 respite beds. At the time of the inspection 5 people were using the service.
People’s experience of the service and what we found:
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessment and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.
People stated they felt safe living at Eden House and we received positive feedback from people and the majority of their relatives about the care provided.
Risk assessments and care plans contained sufficient detail and guidance for staff to respond to risk effectively.
People were safeguarded from abuse and avoidable harm. There were sufficient numbers of staff and staff supported people in line with their individual preferences and agreed care plans.
The provider supported people to engage in community-based activities and other activities at home. However, 2 people’s relatives felt activities could be improved further. The provider was working in this area to enhance people’s social stimulation, people now had their own activities planner that matched the person’s interests.
Accidents and incidents were recorded and analysed to ensure risks were identified and mitigated and lessons were learnt. The management team operated an open and honest working environment and looked to improve the service and learn from mistakes.
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 good (published 24 November 2023).
Why we inspected
We undertook this targeted inspection to check on specific concerns we had about staffing culture and a lack of social stimulation. The overall rating for the service has not changed following this targeted inspection and remains good.
We use targeted inspections to follow up on Warning Notices or to check concerns. They do not look at an entire key question, only the part of the key question we are specifically concerned about. Targeted inspections do not change the rating from the previous inspection. This is because they do not assess all areas of a key question.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection by selecting the 'all reports' link for Eden House on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow Up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
Eden House is a care home providing personal care to people with a learning disability and autistic people. The service accommodates 3 people on a permanent basis and has 2 respite beds. At the time of the inspection 4 people were using the service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.
Right Support:
Staff focused on people's strengths and promoted what they could do, so people had a fulfilling and meaningful everyday life. People had a choice about their living environment and were able to personalise their rooms.
Staff supported people with their medicines in a way which promoted their independence and achieved the best possible health outcome. Staff supported people to play an active role in maintaining their own health and wellbeing.
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. All relatives felt people we safe and happy at Eden House.
Right Care:
People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity. They understood and responded to their individual needs. Staff understood how to protect people from poor care, abuse, and harm.
The provider had robust safeguarding systems which included working alongside other agencies when things went wrong. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to apply it. People could communicate with staff and understand information given to them because staff supported them consistently and understood their individual communication needs.
People could take part in activities and pursue interests tailored to them. The provider gave people opportunities to try new activities which enhanced and enriched their lives.
Right Culture:
People received a good standard of care, support, and treatment because trained staff and specialists could meet their needs and wishes. Staff placed people's wishes, needs, and rights at the heart of everything they did.
People, and those important to them, were involved in planning their care. However, some relatives felt communication could be improved. Managers ensured risks of a closed culture were minimised, so people received support based on transparency, respect, and inclusivity.
People told us they felt safe and knew how to raise concerns. Staff assessed health and safety risks and supported infection prevention and control processes. There were enough staff to meet peoples' needs and recruitment processes ensured staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people.
Peoples' health and nutrition needs were supported, and staff were aware of their responsibility to promote peoples' rights. However, some relatives felt more information about healthy eating would reduce the risks of people gaining weight. Systems were in place to monitor quality and safety, and the provider sort regular feedback from people to improve their support.
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 good (published 22 September 2017)
Why we inspected
We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good and due to the length of time since the service was last inspected.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
We found the following examples of good practice.
There were effective measures in place to minimise the risks around COVID-19. People and staff were tested regularly for COVID-19, in line with government guidance. All staff employed at the home had been vaccinated to help keep people safe from the risk of infection.
Systems were in place to ensure that relatives could visit their family members.
The environment was clean, well maintained and hygienic. Cleaning schedules and audits were in place. This helped to minimise the spread of infection.
The service had risk assessments and policies and procedures in place to manage the risks of COVID-19. The registered manager had regular contact with the local authority and infection control teams
Eden House is a small residential and day care service for people who have learning disabilities. It is situated in a large five bedroomed property set in its own grounds in Droylsden, Greater Manchester. At the time of our inspection there were four people who lived there permanently, but two of these were on holiday. A fifth person was staying as a guest on respite care.
There was a registered manager in place. 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.
There was a warm and friendly atmosphere at Eden House, the home was secure and people told us they felt safe. Staff were familiar with the local authority safeguarding policy and procedures and when allegations of abuse had been made these were investigated.
There were sufficient staff to meet needs, and we saw that recruitment procedures ensured that staff were recruited safely. People who used the service were involved in both the recruitment process and new staff induction to their role.
People’s care records contained detailed information to guide staff on the care and support to be provided. They also showed that risks to people's health and well-being had been identified, and gave detailed instruction to staff to minimise the risks.
The staff we spoke with had an in- depth knowledge and understanding of the needs of the people they were looking after. We saw that staff provided respectful, kindly and caring attention to people who used the service. They ensured that they followed effective procedures to limit the spread of infection, including use of personal protective equipment. Staff were trained to administer medicines and we saw procedures were in place to ensure the safe management of medicines.
Staff understood issues around capacity and consent, and offered people choices to support their independence. People who did not have family or representatives and were not always able to speak for themselves had access to advocates who gave independent advice and acted in the person’s best interest.
Staff communicated well with each other and we saw that information was exchanged between staff informally throughout the working day, and a detailed handover meeting took place at the start and finish of every shift to ensure that care and support was provided in accordance with people’s changing needs.
People who used the service planed the menu, and told us the food was good. We saw that attention was paid to ensure people maintained a healthy and nutritious diet. We saw that staff monitored people’s physical and mental health needs, and ensured they had good access to healthcare staff.
People were treated in a caring and compassionate manner, by cheerful staff. One person who used the service told us, “It’s fabulous; I am free to do whatever I choose. If they asked me to leave I’d say no, it’s the best place I’ve lived in by far.” Care was person centred and delivered by staff who understood how to interact with the people who used the service. We saw people were comfortable and looked well cared for by staff who knew them well.
All the people who used the service had been referred to Eden House because their behaviours had been challenging at other service provision. However, there were few instances of challenging behaviour. Care plans reflected people’s needs and wishes and gave a good outline of the individual, actions to take to support the person to maintain their independence, recognition of personal preferences, and actions to take to minimise risk. We saw care records and daily logs were thorough and gave a good chronology of interventions, indicating any changes in the person’s presentation or needs. People’s preferences and wishes were taken into consideration in the day-to-day delivery of care and support.
The service was well led by a management team committed to service improvement and providing a high quality of care. Regular checks were made to measure and improve the delivery of good quality care to the people who lived at Eden House.
We inspected this service on the 8th September 2015. This was the first inspection since the home was registered in September 2014. The inspection was unannounced which means they did not know we were coming to the service to undertake an inspection.
Eden House is a detached property in the Droylsden area of Manchester. Accommodation is available to provide live in support for up to five people, on either a long-term or respite basis. Support can also be provided via the service’s day care provision where people come to the service for the day to receive support. These people are routinely people that have previously stayed in the accommodation service and could stay in the provision again. People using the service are primarily people with a Learning Disability.
On the day of inspection there were two people using the residential service and two people accessing day care. Another person on a planned respite stay arrived later in the day.
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 ratios were more than adequate to meet the needs of people accessing the service as support was provided on either a one to one or two to one basis, dependent on assessed need.
We found robust recruitment processes were in place to ensure that the right people were appointed to support roles.
Both staff and management had an understanding of safeguarding. However whilst they knew how to report an issue if they became concerned, we found evidence that not every incident that warranted reporting had been escalated accordingly.
We identified a breach of Regulation 13 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.
Accident and incident mechanisms were in place and we found medication administration and management was safe.
Whilst risks had been identified with particular individuals not all had a corresponding risk assessment in place. We also found working practices and some issues with the premises meant that the control of infection was compromised.
We identified breaches of Regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.
The induction process for staff ensured they were familiar with people using the service before support was provided on a 1:1 basis. Staff spoke highly about the training and support provided to them and had knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
Management, staff and service users had good relationships. We observed staff treating individuals with dignity and respect and noted that improvements to signage around the home would assist with this.
People using the service were referred to as guests and we saw everyone that used the service was offered opportunities to make choices about their daily routines. We found evidence that people had been involved in making decisions about their care and support. Menus were varied and service users had input into these and helped staff with the cooking.
People who used the service accessed events and activities within the community promoted by the service.
We found that some files contained information that would ensure person-centred care was delivered however one file documented conflicting information. Care plans had been amended and re-printed but the reasons for these changes were not always recorded.
Resident meetings were held on a regular basis. The provider sought the views and opinions of people using the service with regards to relevant topics concerning the home and care provided. There was a system in place for the manager to address complaints made to the home.
Staff we spoke with were proud to work for the service and found the registered manager to be supportive. Staff meetings were undertaken and these meetings were inclusive, with staff being able to give their opinions and contribute to the running of the service. Relevant policies and procedures for the service were in place and available for staff.
Whilst some checks of the service were undertaken by the nominated individual we found there was no effective system of regular audits done by the registered manager. This was a breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.
In relation to the breaches outlined above you can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.