Archived: Elstree Court Care Home

Updated 2 July 2016

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 25 and 26 May 2016 and was unannounced.

The inspection team consisted of two inspectors and an expert by experience in older people’s care and dementia. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before our inspection we reviewed the information we held about the home. We considered information we held about the service this included safeguarding alerts that had been made and notifications which had been submitted. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law.

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.

During the inspection we spoke with seven people who lived in the service who could share their views on their care, seven relatives who were visiting on the day of the inspection. We also spoke with two visiting health care professionals who were attending the service.

We spoke with various staff including the registered manager, the deputy manager, the chef, the activities co-ordinator, two care staff and the receptionist.

After the inspection we spoke with a specialist nurse and contacted a local GP surgery for feedback.

We observed lunch on two days in the dining room and a number of people’s own room when they ate on their own. The inspection team spent time observing people in areas throughout the home and were able to see the interaction between people and staff.

We reviewed a variety of documents which included four care plans and associated risk and individual need assessments. This included ‘pathway tracking’ people living at Elstree Court Care Home. This is when we looked at people’s care documentation in depth and obtained their views on how they found living at the home. It is an important part of our inspection, as it allowed us to capture information about a sample of people receiving care.

We looked at four staff recruitment files, and records of staff training and supervision. We read medicine records and looked at policies and procedures, record of complaints, accidents and incidents and quality assurance records.

Updated 2 July 2016

Elstree Court Care Home provides nursing and personal care for up to 41 people. The service provides accommodation and facilities over three floors and most areas have level access and chair lifts are available in areas where steps are located. Care is provided to people whose main needs relate to nursing and related physical health needs. This includes people who have had a stroke or live with a chronic health condition like Multiple Sclerosis, Diabetes or Motor Neurone Disease. People’s nursing needs varied, some had complex nursing and care needs, others also required support with dementia and memory loss. Elstree Court Care Home also provides end of life care and used community specialist to support them in this care.

At the time of this inspection 32 people were living in the service. This inspection took place on 25 and 26 May 2016 and was unannounced.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

Management systems that included quality monitoring did not always ensure safe and best practice was followed in all areas. Some records had not been completed or maintained in a consistent way to support the care and treatment provided. This could lead to staff not having up to date information on people’s needs and care provided. Lack of clear and accurate records could also lead to staff not following best care practice.

People were looked after by staff who knew and understood them well. Staff treated people with kindness and compassion and supported them to maintain their independence. They showed respect and maintained people’s dignity. All feedback received from people and their representatives through the inspection process were positive about the care, the approach of the staff and atmosphere in the home. People told us they would recommend the home and comments included, “Oh I do like it here, I’m so happy here,” “There’s nothing better than this place,” “I’d give it ten out of ten,” and “It’s just lovely, nice atmosphere and nice kind people.” Feedback from visiting professionals was positive with a multi-disciplinary approach to care and treatment.

Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding procedures and knew what actions to take if there was an allegation of abuse. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Senior staff had an understanding of DoLS and what may constitute a deprivation of liberty.

Staff were provided with a full induction and training programme which supported them to meet the needs of people. Staffing arrangements ensured staff worked in such numbers, with the appropriate skills that people’s needs could be met in a timely and safe fashion. The registered nurses attended additional training to update and ensure their nursing competency.

People were given information on how to make a complaint and said they were comfortable to raise a concern or give feedback. A complaints procedure and comment cards were readily available for people to use.

Staff monitored people’s nutritional needs and responded to them. Preferences and specific diets were provided. People were supported to take part in a range of activities that met their individual needs.

Feedback was sought from people on a daily basis and satisfaction surveys had been completed. The management style fostered in the home was transparent listened and responded to people and staff’s views.