Eagle View Care Home

Updated 8 March 2024

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of this inspection we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak, and to identify good practice we can share with other services.

Inspection team

This inspection was carried out by 3 inspectors 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.

Service and service type

Eagle View Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and/or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement dependent on their registration with us. Eagle View Care Home is a care home without nursing care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Registered Manager

This provider is required to have a registered manager to oversee the delivery of regulated activities at this location. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Registered managers and providers are legally responsible for how the service is run, for the quality and safety of the care provided and compliance with regulations.

At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post. A new manager was in post who had commenced an application to register.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

Inspection activity started on 17 January 2024 and ended on 30 January 2024. We visited the location’s service on 17 and 24 January 2024.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with 6 people who used the service and 6 relatives about their experience of the care provided. We carried out observations to help us understand the experiences of people. We spoke with, and received feedback from, 21 members of staff including the manager, the regional manager, the project manager, senior care workers, care workers, administration, maintenance, domestic, kitchen and activities staff. We also spoke with the nominated individual who is the person nominated to speak with CQC on behalf of the provider.

We reviewed a range of records. This included 8 people's care records and multiple medication records. We looked at 2 staff files in relation to recruitment. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including training data and quality assurance records were reviewed.

Updated 8 March 2024

About the service

Eagle View Care Home is a residential care home providing personal care to up to 42 people. The service provides support to older people and people living with dementia. The service can also support younger adults and adults with a physical disability. At the time of our inspection there were 26 people using the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were not protected from the risk of abuse and improper treatment. Risks to people were not always appropriately assessed, managed, and mitigated. There were medicine stock discrepancies which could not be accounted for. Some areas of the service required cleaning and maintenance. There were some gaps in required recruitment checks.

People’s needs were not always fully assessed. Where people’s needs had been assessed, these needs were not always met. There were sufficient numbers of staff, but they were not always appropriately trained or deployed. Mealtimes were not always person-centred.

People were not always treated with dignity and respect. People were not always fully supported to be independent. We received mixed feedback from family members as to whether they were involved in their relatives’ care.

People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the systems in place did not support this practice.

People were not supported to take part in a range of meaningful activities. On the first day of our inspection there was limited interaction between staff and people using the service. Care was not person-centred, and people’s needs and preferences were not always met. People’s communication needs were not always robustly considered or met.

The culture of the service was not person-centred. Systems and processes had not identified or resolved in a timely manner concerns around person-centred care, safeguarding and dignity and respect. The provider’s systems and processes were not established or operated effectively to assess and monitor the service, and to ensure continuous learning and the improvement of the quality of care. The quality of the service had deteriorated since our previous inspection.

The manager had arranged safeguarding training and had raised awareness of safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures. People we spoke with were happy with the care provided. Medicines were stored safely and securely. A home improvement plan was in place.

Staff confirmed they had regular supervisions, and these were useful. People’s weight was monitored, and referrals made to the dietician where appropriate. People had access to a regular GP who carried out a weekly visit. During the second day of our inspection, we observed kind, caring and attentive interactions between staff and people. A new activities co-ordinator had been recruited.

Information about making a complaint was accessible for people and their relatives. People’s end of life wishes were recorded in their care plans. Staff generally told us they felt supported by management and staff told us they felt more able to raise a concern now, than previously. The manager had introduced ‘resident of the day’ to involve people more and gather feedback about their experience of the service. Most relatives told us they were kept up to date and were involved in discussions.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the Care Quality Commission (CQC) website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 28 September 2022).

Why we inspected

We received concerns in relation to staff practice and the culture of the service. As a result, a decision was made to undertake a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe, effective, and well-led. Due to concerns identified during the inspection, the scope of the inspection was widened to include all five key questions.

We have found that the provider needs to make improvements. You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

You can read the report from our last inspection, by selecting the ‘All inspection reports and timeline’ link for Eagle View Care Home on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Enforcement and Recommendations

We have identified breaches in relation to person-centred care, dignity and respect, safe care and treatment, safeguarding, staffing, recruitment, and governance at this inspection.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will meet with the provider following this report being published to discuss how they will make changes to ensure they improve their rating to at least good. We will work with the local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

The overall rating for this service is ‘Inadequate’ and the service is therefore in ‘special measures’. This means we will keep the service under review and, if we do not propose to cancel the provider’s registration, we will re-inspect within 6 months to check for significant improvements.

If the provider has not made enough improvement within this timeframe and there is still a rating of inadequate for any key question or overall rating, we will take action in line with our enforcement procedures. This will mean we will begin the process of preventing the provider from operating this service. This will usually lead to cancellation of their registration or to varying the conditions the registration.

For adult social care services, the maximum time for being in special measures will usually be no more than 12 months. If the service has demonstrated improvements when we inspect it and it is no longer rated as inadequate for any of the five key questions it will no longer be in special measures.