- Care home
Elm Bank Care Home
This care home is run by two companies: Elm Bank Healthcare Limited and Barchester Healthcare Homes Limited. These two companies have a dual registration and are jointly responsible for the services at the home.
Assessment report published 2 October 2025
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment 16 to July 2025 to 14 August 2025. This assessment included site visits to the service on 16, 17 and 30 July 2025.
Elm Bank Care Home is a residential care home for up to 115 people. At the time of our assessment there were 86 people living at Elm Bank Care Home. People receive accommodation and personal care.
We assessed the service because there had been concerns identified regarding the quality and safety of the home.
At this assessment, we found that while the home demonstrated several areas of good practice, improvements were needed to ensure consistent delivery of high-quality care across all domains.
People were supported by staff who were kind and compassionate. We observed mainly respectful interactions and practices that upheld dignity, such as the separate preparation of pureed meals to maintain presentation and promote a positive dining experience. People spoke positively about the range of activities available, including music, gardening, and community events, which supported emotional wellbeing and social inclusion.
Staff generally provided person-centred care and supported people to make choices about their daily routines. However, we identified gaps in the provision of adaptive equipment, such as cutlery, which limited opportunities for people to maintain independence during mealtimes. This suggests that not all reasonable adjustments had been considered before offering support, impacting autonomy and control.
While the home was responsive to residents’ preferences and promoted community engagement, some systems lacked consistency in ensuring that care was always delivered in line with best practice. Improvements are needed in areas such as promoting independence, reviewing equipment provision, and ensuring that all staff are supported to deliver care that maximises choice and control.
The service was not meeting all regulatory standards at the time of inspection. We have made recommendations to support improvement and will continue to monitor progress.
The provider did not always have systems to identify, assess, and mitigate risks to people’s safety and welfare. Where systems were in place, the provider did not always have sufficient oversight to ensure they were effective. However, the service had recently implemented a new electronic monitoring system which needed to be fully embedded to be most effective.
During the assessment we spoke with 26 residents, 28 relatives and 20 staff including the management team, as well as visiting professionals. There was a registered manager on site, however we were told they had resigned towards the end of this assessment.
We looked at 4 staff files and 8 peoples care records.
The management team were responsive to our findings, taking immediate actions in some cases whilst some require further actions.
Our findings found breaches in safe care and treatment and governance.
We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
People's experience of this service
People told us they felt safe at Elm Bank Care Home. Most people and relatives told us their needs were met. We received mixed feedback regarding staffing numbers; quality of food and how responsive staff were to their needs. People were offered activities to participate in and when people were unable to attend, support was given to people in their bedrooms. People had information they needed to understand what care provision they required, and effective communication care plans were in place.There was a complaints process in place. People and their relatives mainly told us when needed they had access to health professionals,however we were made aware of one person experiencing a delay.
People and their relatives were actively involved in the planning of their care.
Some people could not directly tell us about their experience. We used observations to assess whether they received good care. This showed positive interactions between people and staff.