Eldonian House Care Centre

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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 71 (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’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People’s needs were assessed prior to their admission into the service. The registered manager confirmed, “We like to do full assessments ourselves. We want to make sure the new person is a right fit for the home.” Any expected outcomes were identified, and care and support were regularly reviewed to help ensure it was relevant to people’s current needs. Where people were unable to fully participate in decisions about their care, the provider involved people’s significant others where appropriate. One relative told us, “The managers ring us if there are any concerns and always involve us in [Name’s] care.”

Although we were assured the provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them, daily care records did not always accurately record and capture people’s care and support. For one person who was at risk of pressure injury, their care plan recorded they required hourly positional changes in the night. However, when we checked the person’s daily records, it appeared that although welfare checks had been carried out, positional changes hadn’t been appropriately documented. Some people’s daily care records did not contain sufficient detail. For one person who required regular welfare checks overnight – records simply recorded them as being ‘asleep.’ Therefore, it was not always possible to know how the person had been checked and what checks had been made. We spoke to the registered manager about this who confirmed issues with recording of daily care had already been identified and additional training and support was being provided for staff, to help improve the quality and accuracy of records. People had access to nutritional food and drink and had choice over what they wanted to eat. Options on the menu included scouse, roast dinners and fish on a Friday. People told us they enjoyed the food, comments included, “Food is excellent, there’s plenty of choice and it’s cooked well”, “Food is nice and there is enough to eat” and “Food is lovely and if there is a birthday or celebration they will put on a special spread.” We observed people enjoying lunch, the dining experience was not rushed and provided people with an opportunity to get together and socialise.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services. The provider worked collaboratively across services to better understand and meet people’s needs. The provider used an electronic care recording system, so information could be shared quickly and easily with other external health care professionals.

A visiting professional commented, “The Eldonian team are always efficient in highlighting any specific problems that need to be discussed with the GP and the rest of the MDT (Multi-Disciplinary Team), any information requested on the day is always available.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. The provider made appropriate and timely referrals to other relevant professionals to help people achieve better outcomes regarding their health and well-being. We saw examples of referrals being made to SALT (Speech and Language Therapy) team where the provider had recognised people requiring modifications to their diet. The provider also worked in partnership with district nurses and mental health professionals to manage people’s long-term health conditions.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. Care and support were regularly reviewed and updated to ensure people’s needs were met. Written reviews of care were documented in people’s care and support plans. Any changes in care were clearly rationalised.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Staff empowered people to make decisions about their care, so their human and legal rights were upheld. People told us their rights were respected. The provider assessed whether people had capacity to make decisions and involved relevant professions when needed. Where people did not have capacity, staff upheld their rights in the least restrictive way possible and referred people for professional assessment at the earliest opportunity.