Archived: Eagle Care Home

Updated 30 November 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 checked 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 24 September 2018 and 4 October 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection was undertaken on the first day by two adult social care 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. On the second day there was one adult social care inspector.

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. We reviewed the PIR and other information we held about the service. This included past reports and notifications. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

We spoke with a range of people about the service; this included 10 people who lived at Eagle Care Home. During the inspection we spoke with four staff members, the cook, a domestic, the registered manager and the registered provider. We also spoke with six people’s visitors, two visiting social workers, a visiting district nurse, a community matron and a physiotherapist.

We looked at care records of four people who lived at the service and recruitment records of three staff members. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service. In addition, we checked the building to ensure it was clean, hygienic and a safe place for people to live.

Updated 30 November 2018

We carried out an unannounced inspection of Eagle Care Home on 24 September and 4 October 2018. Eagle Care Home is a care home which provides care and support for up to 33 older people. At the time of this inspection there were 27 people living at the service. 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. This was the first inspection of the service since a change of registered provider.

The service is on two floors with access to floors via stairs or a passenger lift. Shared living areas include three lounges on the ground floor, and a dining room. The service stands in its own grounds with garden areas.

There was a registered manager in post who was responsible for the day-to-day running of the service. 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.

There was a friendly welcoming environment and people said they felt Eagle Care Home was a homely place to live.People told us that they felt safe living at Eagle Care Home. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood how to recognise and report abuse. We observed warm and friendly interactions between staff and people throughout the inspection and it was evident staff knew people well. Staff were compassionate about caring for people at the end of their lives.

Risks to people's health and welfare were not always clearly documented for staff to be able to support people safely or effectively. Care plans were well organised, with information easy to find. However, these were not always detailed enough to ensure people’s needs were met fully.

Medicines were not always managed safely, with areas requiring improvement, particularly around recording and 'as required' medicines.

Staff felt supported to carry out their work and they understood their roles and responsibilities. There were enough staff to support people; they worked well as a team and communicated continuously to meet people’s needs.

Staff understood how to keep people safe from the spread of infection and infection control practice was mostly appropriate. There were some routine maintenance checks and staff knew how to report maintenance issues, although safety checks for premises and equipment were not always robust.

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. People's consent to care was appropriately sought within the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act.

People enjoyed the quality food and there were always drinks available. There were some activities provided and most people felt there was plenty to do.

There was a complaints process in place and people and relatives knew how to make a complaint. There had been no complaints since the service was registered under the new provider name. Visitors told us that they felt welcome within the home and able to visit whenever they wanted.

People and relatives felt the registered manager was visible and accessible to people and they were confident in the care that was being provided. Systems and processes for assessing and monitoring the quality of the provision were not fully robust or consistent. The registered manager was very responsive to feedback about the service and welcomed people’s views.

You can see the action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.