Archived: Engelberg

Updated 22 June 2019

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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team: This inspection was completed by one inspector 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: Engelberg is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service accommodates up to 34 people. At the time of our visit there were 31 people using the service.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection: The inspection was unannounced.

What we did: Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. The provider returned the PIR and we took this into account when we made judgements in this report. We reviewed other information that we held about the service such as notifications. These are events that happen in the service that the provider is legally required to tell us about.

During the inspection we spoke with 10 people who lived at the service and five people’s relatives. We also spoke with nine members of staff, this included the registered manager, administrative staff, a chef and care staff. We also spoke with two visiting healthcare professionals. We reviewed four people’s care and support records. We also reviewed records relating to the management of the service such as incident and accident records, meeting minutes, training records, policies, audits and complaints.

After the inspection we contacted healthcare professionals who had a contract with the service to obtain their views of the service provided. We received one response.

Updated 22 June 2019

About the service:

Engelberg is a residential home. It provides accommodation and personal care for up to 34 people. At the time of the inspection, there were 31 people using the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

People were supported by staff that were caring, compassionate and treated them with dignity and respect. Staff understood the needs of the people they supported and their communication needs. Staff we spoke with told us that providing people with a quality lifestyle was their objective. Staff told us they provided person centred care and we observed positive relationships between people and staff in a calm environment.

Risks of abuse to people were minimised because the service had robust safeguarding systems and processes. Staff understood safeguarding reporting processes. The registered manager had an oversight of current and historical safeguarding matters and communicated with external agencies when needed.

There were effective systems that ensured the service was safe. Health and safety checks, together with effective checks of the environment were carried out by dedicated staff. Some staff told us that although people’s needs were met this was not always timely. Plans to increase staffing numbers were already in process.

People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs. Staff understood their role and were confident when performing it through a continual training package. Staff at the service worked together with a range of healthcare professionals to achieve positive outcomes for people and followed professional advice to achieve this. Healthcare professional feedback we received was positive.

People were supported in the least restrictive way possible; the policies, systems and culture in the service supported this practice. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and applied the principles of the Act when performing their role. There were effective systems in place that ensured people who were deprived of their liberty were done so with the appropriate legal authority.

People's concerns and complaints were listened and responded to. Accidents, incidents and complaints were used as opportunities to learn and improve the service. There were effective systems at both service and provider level to share key events and incidents to reduce the risk of recurrence. Staff felt activity provision could be increased and recruitment for a new activities member of staff to achieve this had already commenced.

People and their relatives gave us positive feedback about the quality of care people received. The feedback on the leadership of the service and the registered manager was positive. Quality monitoring systems included audits, observation of staff practice and regular checks of the environment to ensure people received optimal care.

Rating at last inspection: Good (Report published November 2016)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive. We will inspect in line with our inspection programme or sooner if required.

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