Echelforde

Updated 11 February 2020

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. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an expert by experience on the first day. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. On the second day a single inspector returned to complete the inspection.

Service and service type

Echelforde 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.

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

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service. This included details about incidents the provider must tell us about, such as any safeguarding alerts they had raised. We also contacted the local authority commissioning and safeguarding teams to ask for their views about the service. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection

We spoke with ten people and nine relatives or visitors. Some people were not able to fully express their views about the care they received. We observed the care provided in the communal areas and tracked people’s care, to better understand their experiences and to see that it matched with their care records.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI) on both days of the inspection. SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We spoke with four care workers, one team leader, the senior team leader, the chef, the maintenance person, a member of the activity team, a volunteer and the registered manager.

We reviewed a range of records. This included seven care plans and staff recruitment and training records. We also reviewed records used to manage the service, for example, maintenance records, medicines administration records and meeting minutes.

After the inspection

We requested some further information to be sent to us for example, in relation to staff training and supervision. We contacted three health care professionals to obtain their views about the service.

Updated 11 February 2020

About the service

Echelforde is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care. The service can support up to 50 people. Thirty-eight people were living at the home at the time of the inspection. The service supports people aged over 65 years many of whom are living with dementia in five smaller units on the ground floor. A large garden forms a semicircle round the building

People’s experience of using this service

People told us they received outstanding care from staff who demonstrated kindness and compassion and valued people’s uniqueness. We observed people’s well-being was enhanced as a result of the way staff cared for them. People were encouraged in a distinctive way to be as independent as possible and to be involved in decisions about their care. People were treated with consistent respect and dignity and staff valued people’s individual characteristics. They understood the person first and their dementia needs were also recognised and supported.

The home had innovative links with community groups and offered a wide range of stimulating activities. People had personalised care plans that guided staff on how to meet their needs in a person-centred way. People’s end of life care needs were identified and met.

People told us they felt safe. Staff understood their roles in safeguarding people from harm. Risks to people were identified and assessed. There was guidance for staff on staff how to manage these risks safely. There was a robust process to identify learning from accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and safe recruitment practices were in place. Medicines were safely managed.

People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. Staff were being supported to ensure they had suitable skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. The home had been was adapted to meet the range of needs of the people living there.

People were asked for their consent before care was provided. 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 in the service supported this practice. People’s nutritional needs were assessed and met. People had access to health and social care professionals as required. There was an accessible complaints system and there had been no complaints since the last inspection.

People and their relatives were positive about improvements made to the culture at the home with the current registered manager. The registered manager promoted an open culture of communication and learning, worked proactively with other agencies and was visible as an effective leader. The home engaged with a wide number of community groups and people accessed the community regularly. There was a system to monitor the quality and safety of the service and any learning was identified and acted on. People’s views about the service were asked for and acted on.

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 13 June 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.