- Care home
Eden Cottage Care Home
Assessment report published 4 November 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
About the service
The service is a care home. There were 25 people using the service at the time of the assessment.
Who the service is for
This service supports older people, people with a disability and people living with dementia.
Key findings
We carried out this assessment on 29 September 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.
People told us they felt safe living at the home and relatives spoke positively about the care and support provided. We observed kind, respectful and unhurried interactions between staff and people. People were supported by enough staff who had the skills and knowledge to support them safely. Staffing levels were stable, with no agency use, and staff described feeling well supported by visible and approachable leaders. Risks were assessed and people were involved in the process. There were effective systems in place to safeguard people from abuse. Medicines were administered safely. The environment was clean and well maintained, with appropriate safety checks completed.
People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found that staff and management worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. MCA records needed improvement to ensure they were always issue specific and appropriately detailed.
Care plans were in place and covered key areas of people’s needs and risks. However, some care records would benefit from further improvement to ensure these reflected changes in people’s needs, such as deterioration of verbal communication. We fed this back and the registered manager agreed to review these records straight away. Staff supported people appropriately and had detailed knowledge of people’s needs, a professional told us, “Staff are very approachable and knowledgeable.”
There were effective checks and governance processes in place. The management had a clear commitment to creating a positive and supportive culture. Leaders were qualified and experienced, they ensured learning was embedded into practice and used to develop the service.
People's experience of this service
People and relatives had a positive experience of the home. People and relatives described caring and compassionate staff and a visible manager whom they could speak with at any time. A relative told us, “The staff are brilliant, all genuine.”
People and relatives confirmed they were supported to be safe while living at the service and that staff treated them with care and compassion. We saw staff respond quickly when people were confused or distressed. Staff's knowledge of people allowed them to respond in a person-centred way.
People told us they had choice and control over their lives and were supported to be as independent as possible. Staff and the activities coordinator supported people with activities 7 days a week. We observed people taking part in crafts. People told us about trips to the local park and a local children's group that came into the home to do dance and movement activities with people. One person told us about taking part in a recent Olympics-themed event with other care homes. They said, “There is always something going on, we have fun.”
Some people could not directly tell us about their experience. We used a structured observation tool to assess whether they received good care. This approach showed people were included and listened to, and staff interacted positively with them. People's privacy and dignity were respected, and people were asked for their consent before care was provided.
Some people and relatives told us they were not aware of avenues for feedback, although they said they would raise concerns with staff. The home had various ways people could share their views about the service, such as meetings and surveys. We spoke with the registered manager about this, and they told us they would review communication regarding routes for feedback. The home had won awards from a care home review website over several years, based on positive reviews about the service. The home had received few complaints and numerous compliments. One person told us, “I’ve no issues. I would speak up. I’d tell them if I did.”
People received support in relation to their health and wellbeing and experienced positive outcomes. Several relatives told us about staff seeking healthcare input for their family members. Professionals we spoke with told us the home was very responsive to people's needs and followed guidance to ensure their health and wellbeing were optimised.