Eden Court Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 67 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People’s care needs were assessed before they began receiving a service. Relatives told us they were happy with the way their loved one’s needs were assessed. Everyone had care plans and appropriate risk assessments in place. We found some care plans were more detailed and person-centred than others. We raised this with the manager who arranged some additional training for staff. Staff felt they were aware of people’s needs and were kept informed of any changes in different ways including handover. Staff were also aware of what action they would take if people’s needs changed. For example, they would liaise with the GP or Care Home Liaison Team to ensure people’s needs were met.

People’s care plans and risk assessments were routinely reviewed and updated to ensure the information remained effective to meet their needs. During our inspection, we observed people enjoying their meals and snacks. We also received positive feedback from people about the food they received. There was a range of activities offered at the service, this was mostly in 1 unit. It was felt people living on the nursing unit did not want to take part in activities as they had plenty of visits from relatives and health professionals, but they had the option to take part if they wished. We observed lots of people enjoying the activities on offer. Activities also included external entertainers and going out in the community.

Staff worked with health professionals to ensure people got the care and support they needed. During our inspection, we observed therapy staff completing sessions with people and having discussions with care staff. We also observed other health professionals visiting the home. Staff had good knowledge of people and shared this with health professionals. Relatives confirmed they were kept informed about changes in their loved one’s needs. One relative said, “Whenever we visit, staff always consult us over the care and frequently ask if we are happy with the care provided.”

Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. Care plans included information about people’s healthcare needs and how they were met. Clinical recording tools were used where appropriate to monitor people’s health needs. People told us they were supported to live healthier lives and their choices were respected.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and support. Therapy was also reviewed by the therapy team on site. Staff were allocated to work in the same individual units to ensure the care and support delivered was consistent. We observed staff consistently follow guidelines to ensure they could respond safely to a person’s distress. They communicated well with the person to avert situations that had the potential to escalate.

The home did not always have appropriate authorisation in place for some of the restrictive practises in place. We found some people did not have the use of bed rails included in the Deputy of Liberty Safeguards Authorisation (DoLS), this was promptly addressed by the registered manager. Decision specific capacity assessments had been completed with people. We observed staff asking for consent throughout the day. Relatives and people also confirmed consent was sought. One person told us, “Staff always explained what they needed to do and check if I am comfortable with it.” Relatives were very impressed with the way staff spoke to their loved ones before carrying out any task. Staff had good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act and knew what they would do if they felt someone lacked capacity.