We carried out a review of the data available to us about The Eadmund on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about The Eadmund, you can give feedback on this service.
The Eadmund is a residential care home that provides accommodation and personal care support for up to 15 adults who have a range of needs including physical and learning disabilities. The service also offers a short break respite service for informal carers. The home is two houses joined together allowing people to move freely around both houses. There are facilities and equipment in place for people who require physical support and a sensory room offering a quiet relaxing space for people. At the time of our inspection 11 people were using the service; this included one person who was on a short respite break.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. It is registered for the support of up to 15 people. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and the other large domestic homes of a similar size. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.
People’s experience of using this service
The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. There was a strong visible person-centred culture within the staffing team, with staff ensuring people were treated equally and fairly. People and their relatives spoke positively about the care and support received. During our inspection we observed that staff interacted well with people and had built good respectful relationship’s and rapport with them.
Relatives told us their loved ones were safe and well supported. Safeguarding and whistleblowing policies and procedures were in place and staff were aware of how to keep people safe. People were protected from identified risks and plans were in place to manage risks safely in the least restrictive way. There were arrangements in place to manage medicines safely and staff followed appropriate infection control practices to prevent the spread of infections. Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work. There were sufficient staff available to meet people's needs. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to support people appropriately. Staff were supported through induction, training and supervision.
People were supported to meet their nutritional needs and to maintain a balanced diet ensuring continued well-being. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. The home environment was clean, homely and suitably adapted to meet the needs of the people living there, people had individualised rooms.
People and their relatives were involved and consulted about their care and support needs. People had access to health and social care professionals as required. People were supported to access community services and to participate in activities of their choosing that met their needs. Staff worked with people to promote their rights and understood the Equality Act 2010; supporting people appropriately addressing any protected characteristics. There were systems in place to assess, monitor and improve the quality of the service. Complaints were managed and responded to appropriately in line with the providers policy. The service worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to ensure appropriate support was provided to individuals.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection: Good (Published 3 August 2017).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
At our last inspection in May 2015 the service was rated as good.
At this inspection we found the service continued to meet the regulations and fundamental standards and remained good.
Relatives were confident people were safe at the service and told us their relatives were happy living at The Eadmund. Staff were aware of the risks people faced both in the service and in the community and they knew how to manage those risks to keep people safe while still encouraging people’s independence.
There were enough qualified and skilled staff at the service. Staffing was managed flexibly to suit people's needs so that people received their care and support when they needed it. Staff had access to the information, support and training they needed to do their jobs well.
The registered manager and staff understood the relevant requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and how it applied to people in their care. People and where appropriate their relatives, were involved in decisions about their care, were encouraged to make choices in their everyday life and supported to be as independent as they could be. Staff understood people’s individual needs and supported people with dignity and respect.
Care records focused on the person and were updated according to any changes in people’s health and wellbeing. People were supported to have their health needs met. We saw that people’s prescribed medicines were being stored securely and managed safely.
The provider had a number of audits and quality assurance systems to help them understand the quality of the care and support people received and look at ways to continually improve the service.
Our inspection took place on 19 and 20 May 2015 and was unannounced.
The Eadmund is a residential care service that provides housing and personal support for up to 15 adults who have a range of needs including learning disabilities and offers a short break service. At the time of our inspection 12 people were using the service. At our last inspection in January 2014 the service was meeting the regulations inspected.
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.
The service knew how to keep people safe. Staff helped make sure people were safe at The Eadmund and in the community by looking at the risks they may face and by taking steps to reduce those risks.
People were cared for by staff who received appropriate training and support to do their job well. Staff felt supported by managers. There were enough qualified and skilled staff at the service. Staffing was managed flexibly to suit people's needs so that people received their care and support when they needed it. Staff had access to the information, support and training they needed to do their jobs well.
We observed staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and were able to use various forms of interaction to communicate with them. Care records focused on people as individuals and gave clear information for people and staff using a variety of photographs, easy to read and pictorial information. Staff supported people in a way which was kind, caring, and respectful.
Staff helped to keep people healthy and well, they supported people to attend appointments with GP’s and other healthcare professionals when they needed to. Medicines were stored safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed. People were supported to have a balanced diet and were able to make food and drink choices. Meals were prepared taking account of people’s health, cultural and religious needs.
A number of audits and quality assurance systems helped the manager and provider to understand the quality of the care and support people received. Accidents and incidents were reported and examined and the manager and staff used this information to improve the service.
As part of this inspection we spoke with the registered manager who told us that there was now in place a new supervision policy and procedure for staff. We were told that this had been put into practice with all staff. We were also told that a comprehensive training plan had been established and delivered to the staff team.
All the people we met told us the staff who worked at the Centre were kind and caring, and felt that staff treated them well. We saw the way that staff interacted with people was always characterised by warmth, kindness and empathy. Staff treated people who used the service with respect and dignity.
At the time of this inspection there were ten permanent residents and three people receiving respite care or having short term breaks. All of the residents had learning and physical disabilities and all but one of the residents did not have the ability to communicate verbally except in a very limited capacity. We did speak to that person and we also spoke to six close relatives of the residents in order to gain their views about the care of the residents.
One of the residents talked positively about their care and support. They said they liked living at the home and that they liked the carers. They were able to say that they enjoyed the activity programme and they indicated that they liked going to college and that they liked the food provided for them at the home.
All of the relatives we spoke with told us they thought the care and support given to the residents was good. One person said, 'I am very pleased with the care given'. Another said, 'I think it is really good, I have no complaints or concerns, it is all fine'. One other person said, 'It's a lovely home, they have been so good to my son, he's very well looked after'.
All of the residents have learning and physical disabilities and all but one of the residents do not have the ability to communicate verbally except in a very limited capacity. We did speak to that person and we also spoke to four close relatives of the residents in order to gain their views about the care of the residents.
One of the residents talked positively about his care and support. He said he liked living at the home and that he liked the carers. He was able to say that he enjoyed the activity programme and he indicated that he liked going to college and that he liked the food provided for him at the home.
All of the relatives we spoke with told us they thought the care and support given to the residents was good. One person said, 'I have always been very pleased with the care given'. Another said, 'I think it is really good, I have no complaints or concerns, it is all fine'. One other person said, 'He's getting excellent care, he's very well looked after'.
Overall, we have found that The Eadmund meets the essential standards but to maintain this we have suggested that some improvements are made. Please see the main report for this information.