28 April 2016
During a routine inspection
We last inspected Elswick Hall Care Home in September 2014. At that inspection we found the service was meeting the legal requirements in force at the time.
The home provides nursing care and support for up to 47 people, some of whom may have mental health needs or live with dementia and associated conditions. The 'neuro-disability' suite, located on the ground floor, provides nursing care to 18 people with various neurological conditions, as well as people with acquired brain injuries.
A registered manager was 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.
People said they felt safe. We had concerns however that there were not enough staff on duty to provide timely and individual care to people. Care was provided with kindness and people's privacy and dignity were respected. However, we saw staff were busy and did not always have time to interact and talk with people except when they were carrying out care tasks.
People were protected as staff had received training about safeguarding and knew how to respond to any allegation of abuse. When new staff were appointed, thorough vetting checks were carried out to make sure they were suitable to work with people who needed care and support. Appropriate training was provided and staff were supervised and supported.
Elswick Hall Care Home was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff had received training and had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and best interest decision making, when people were unable to make decisions themselves. People had access to health care professionals to make sure they received appropriate care and treatment. Systems were in place for people to receive their medicines in a safe way.
Communication was effective, ensuring people, their relatives and other relevant agencies were kept up to date about any changes in people's care and support needs and the running of the service.
Menus were varied and a choice was offered at each mealtime. Staff supported people who required help to eat and drink and special diets were catered for.
Limited activities were available for people and the activities and entertainment programme required expansion to ensure it met people's interests. We have made a recommendation about more activities provision across the home.
The environment was mostly well-maintained but some bedrooms were showing signs of wear and tear.
A complaints procedure was available. People told us they would feel confident to speak to staff about any concerns if they needed to. People had the opportunity to give their views about the service. There was regular consultation with people or family members and their views were used to improve the service. The provider undertook a range of audits to check on the quality of care provided.
You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.