Archived: Ebor Court

Updated 5 February 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection took place on the 11 December it was unannounced.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector. Prior to our visit we reviewed information about the service. This included notifications and other information held about the service.

Before the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. Although we had not received the Provider Information Return (PIR) prior to our visit, the manager showed us confirmation that this was submitted on the 26 November and we were given a copy.  

During our visit we spent time observing people in communal areas, talked with 11 people using the service, spoke with two relatives and other visitors, interviewed four staff, and carried out a short observational framework for inspection (SOFI). This is a way of observing the care and interactions people receive to capture their experiences when they may not be able to tell us themselves.

We looked at all areas of the home, including some bedrooms (with people’s permission). We also spent time looking at records, which included the care records for three people who lived at the home, six staff recruitment files, duty rosters and records relating to the management of the home.

We spent time with the area manager and registered manager of the service.

Updated 5 February 2015

The inspection took place on the 11 December 2014. The inspection was unannounced. This was the first inspection of the service since its registration in August 2014.

Ebor Court is registered to provide care and support to up to 64 people some of whom may be living with a dementia type illness. The home is spread across three floors with lift access. It has a secure enclosed garden area with raised flower beds. There were thirty-one people living at the home on the day of our visit.

The home has 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 told us they felt safe and cared for living at Ebor Court. They told us that staff knew and understood their needs.

The service had safeguarding vulnerable adults policies and procedures which were understood by staff. Staff received training in safeguarding vulnerable adults and all those spoken with confirmed that they would tell someone should any aspect of poor care be observed.

Staff understood individual risks to people and worked with them to minimise these risks whilst also supporting them to remain as independent as possible.

There was mixed feedback regarding staffing levels; however the registered manager was in the process of recruiting an additional 15 staff. Recruitment systems were robust and appropriate checks were completed before people started work.

Medication systems were being reviewed by the registered manager as some improvements had been identified by the registered manager.

Training was provided for all staff. Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). DoLS are part of the MCA (Mental Capacity Act 2005) legislation which is in place for people who are unable to make decisions for themselves. The legislation is designed to ensure that any decisions are made in people’s best interests.

People told us the food was good and they said the chef sought their feedback regarding their likes and dislikes.

People expressed positive comments regarding the care they received. They told us they were treated with kindness and we observed this during our visit.

People told us that the registered manager and staff responded to their needs. Each person had individual care records which focused on them as a person. They told us that social opportunities were available and said they could choose how to spend their time.

The registered manager had not received any complaints although they had systems in place should any be received.

People spoke positively of the registered manager and staff and there was a strong caring ethos which was evident from both feedback and observations.

The registered manager had a number of quality monitoring systems in place which focused on reviewing and improving the service. Although these systems were in the early stages of use we could see that they resulted in relevant action plans being implemented so that improvements could be made.