Ernvale House Care Centre

Updated 27 July 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 18 and 19 June 2018 and was unannounced.

The inspection team consisted of three 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.

We used the information we held about the service to formulate our inspection plan. This included statutory notifications that the provider had sent to us. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. These include information about safeguarding concerns, serious injuries and deaths that had occurred at the service. We also considered feedback we had received from other sources including members of the public, the fire service and local authority commissioners about the services provided at Ernvale House Care Centre.

We spoke with ten people who used the services and seven relatives of people who used the service. We also spoke with a visiting healthcare professional. We did this to gain their views about the care and to check that standards of care were being met. Some people who used the service were not able to speak to us about their care experiences so we observed how the staff interacted with people in communal areas and we looked at the care records of nine people who used the service, to see if their records were accurate and up to date. We also used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We spoke with 12 members of care staff including two activities coordinators. We also spoke with the registered manager, two clinical leads, the residential service manager and the provider’s regional operations manager. We looked at records relating to the management of the service. These included six staff recruitment files, training records, incident records, meeting minutes and quality assurance records.

Updated 27 July 2018

This inspection took place on 18 and 19 June 2018 and was unannounced.

This was the first comprehensive inspection under the current registration.

Ernvale House Care Centre is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Ernvale House Care Centre accommodates up to 85 people over five separate units. Four of the units provide nursing care and each had its own clinical lead. The residential unit had its own residential manager. At the time of this inspection there were 73 people using the service.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection who had overall responsibility for management across all five units. 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’s medicines were not always managed safely to ensure they received their medicines as prescribed.

People were protected from avoidable abuse and harm by trained staff. Risks were assessed, identified and managed appropriately. Staff were aware of people’s risks and how to reduce them.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people's needs and staff had their suitability to work in a care setting checked before they began working with people. The service was clean and tidy and people were protected from the spread of infection. The registered manager had systems in place to learn when things went wrong.

People’s needs were suitably assessed and support was delivered in line with current law and guidance. People were supported by trained staff and received effective care in line with their support needs. Staff received regular supervision and had access to continuous training. There was a good choice of food, which people enjoyed and they received support to meet their nutrition and hydration needs.

The environment was designed and adapted to support people effectively and there were plans in place to further improve the environment. Healthcare professionals were consulted as needed and people had access to a range of healthcare services.

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.

Staff were kind, caring and compassionate with people. People were supported to express their views and encouraged and supported to make their own choices. People were treated with dignity and respect by staff who knew them well.

People’s needs and preferences were assessed and regularly reviewed with them. Activities were organised by staff and people were supported to participate in activities that they preferred. People's diverse needs were considered as part of the assessment and care planning process.

Complaints were managed in line with the provider's policy, to ensure they were suitably investigated and addressed. People were supported to consider their wishes about their end of life care and were supported to be comfortable and pain free at the end of their lives.

A registered manager was in post and people, relatives and staff said they were approachable and supportive. People, their relatives and staff were involved in the development of the service and they were given opportunities to provide feedback that was acted upon. The registered manager and provider had systems in place to check on the quality of the service and use this to make improvements. The service worked in partnership with other agencies to provide good support for people.