Saint Elkas Care Home

Updated 7 December 2017

We carried out this inspection visit 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.

Our inspection was unannounced and the team consisted of one inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

The inspection was informed by information we held about the service and the provider. This included notifications that the provider had sent to us about incidents at the service and information that we had received from the public. We also spoke with the local authority who provided us with their current monitoring information. We used this information to formulate our inspection plan. We also spoke with a social worker linked to supporting people at this service. Their comments were positive and had been reflected within the report.

People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Saint Elkas is a large house set in extensive gardens, with a small self-contained annex at the rear of the property. The home’s ground floor accommodation comprises of a lounge, dining and games room, kitchen, small office and medicine room. The upstairs accommodation contains the bedrooms and bathroom facilities. The home provides support to people with mental health needs.

The provider completed 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. We reviewed element of the PIR during the inspection.

We spoke with four people who used the service. Most of the people were able to tell us their experience of their life in the home, however we also observed how the staff interacted with people in communal areas.

We also spoke with two members of care staff and the registered manager. We looked a range of information, which included the training records to see how staff were trained, and care records for four people who used the service. We also looked at the systems the provider had in place to ensure the quality of the service, these included two recruitment files, maintenance documents and a range of audits used to review all areas of the home.

Updated 7 December 2017

We inspected this home on 7 November 2017. At our last inspection we found the provider was meeting the regulations and we rated the home as ‘Good’. Saint Elkas is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The care home is registered to accommodate nine people in one adapted building, on the day of our inspection nine people were using the service. It is a large house set in extensive gardens, with a small self-contained annex at the rear of the property. The home’s ground floor accommodation comprises of a lounge, dining and games room, kitchen, small office and medicine room. The upstairs accommodation contains the bedrooms and bathroom facilities. The home provides support to people with mental health needs.

The service had 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.

People told us they enjoyed living at the home. They felt safe and protected from harm by staff who had the skills and training to support them. There was sufficient staff and there was a flexible arrangement to support appointment or events. Staff had received training in medicine management and provided safe administration. People were supported to learn to administer their own medicine as part of developing their independence skills.

Risk assessments had been completed and people supported with their risks. Guides were provided and measures taken to reduce the risks. Staff had received training for their role. There was a choice of meals which were decided on a weekly basis at a community meeting in the home. People’s diets and preferences had been considered. Referrals had been made to health care professionals to support peoples ongoing health needs or their wellbeing. People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

People felt they had developed positive relationships with staff who provided a kind and caring environment. They were supported to be independent and their choices were respected. People had been involved in the development of their care and any reviews. Their cultural needs had been considered and wishes in relation to religion. Activities, interests and hobbies were available and encouraged to support people to be stimulated and to support their health recovery. People’s care was inclusive and considered people’s last wishes.

Staff were supported by the manager and the home had good links with the provider. The registered manager completed a range of audits which reflected the needs of the home and people receiving the care. Community development had been established and new initiatives taken on board to support the safety of people using the service.

We saw that the previous rating was displayed in the reception of the home as required. The manager understood their responsibility of registration with us and notified us of important events that occurred at the service; this meant we could check appropriate action had been taken.