Archived: Evergreen House Residential Home

Evergreen House Residential Home provides accommodation and nursing or personal care for up to 37 people. On the day of our inspection, 34 people were receiving services, some of whom were living with dementia.

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

People received safe care and support as the staff team had been trained to recognise potential signs of abuse and understood what to do to safely support people.

The provider had assessed the risks to people associated with their care and support. Staff members were knowledgeable about these risks and knew what to do to minimise the potential for harm to people.

Staff members followed effective infection prevention and control procedures when supporting people. Staff members had access to, and used, appropriate personal protection equipment.

People received safe support with their medicines by trained and competent staff members.

The provider supported staff in providing effective care for people through person-centred care planning, training and one-to-one supervision.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems at Evergreen House Residential Home supported this practice.

People had access to additional healthcare services when required. Staff members knew people’s individual health outcomes and supported them appropriately.

People were supported to maintain a healthy diet by a staff team which knew their individual preferences.

People received help and support from a kind and compassionate staff team with whom they had developed positive relationships.

People were supported by staff members who were aware of their individual protected characteristics like age, gender and disability.

People were provided with information in a way they could understand.

The provider had systems in place to encourage and respond to any complaints or compliments from people or those close to them.

The provider, and management team, had good links with the local communities within which people lived.

The management team and provider had systems in place to identify improvements and drive good care.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was ‘Good’ (published 25 April 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.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

People had caring, supportive relationships with staff. They ensured that people’s dignity and privacy was upheld. They knew people well and understood how to comfort them if they were distressed. The environment was planned to meet people’s needs and included accessible activities such as a sweet shop and sensory items. People had care plans which reflected their preferences and were reviewed regularly.

Staff received training and support to enable them to fulfil their role effectively and were encouraged to develop their skills. They also received regular supervision and attended team meetings.

Staff understood their responsibilities to detect and report abuse. Risk was assessed and actions were put in place to reduce it and their effectiveness was monitored and regularly reviewed. Medicines were managed to reduce the risks associated with them and people received them when they needed them.

People felt that there were always enough staff to meet their needs promptly and that they were safe. Staff supported people to make choices and sought consent to their care. When people were unable to make their own decisions they were made in their best interest with people who mattered to them. Restrictions on people’s liberty were avoided but if necessary for someone’s safety then they were legally approved.

People were supported to maintain good health and had regular access to healthcare professionals. Mealtimes were not rushed and people were given a choice of meal. We saw that food and drink was regularly provided and records were maintained for people who were nutritionally at risk.

People were encouraged to pursue interests and hobbies and regular activities were planned. Visitors were welcomed at any time. People knew the registered manager and felt confident that any concerns they raised would be resolved promptly. There were systems in place to drive quality improvement which included regular audits.