Our current view of the service
Updated
20 February 2024
Elliscombe House is a nursing and residential care home providing personal and nursing care for up to 35 people. The service provides support to older people. At the time of our assessment there were 26 people using the service.
We carried out an assessment of the service which started on 12 March 2024 and was completed on 17 April 2024. We carried out visits to the service on 12, 14 and 20 March 2024. The assessment was carried out in response to concerns we had received from various sources, including healthcare professionals working with the service.
We received concerns in relation to the management of people’s medical needs, the management of the service, the environment and the quality of people's care and support. As a result, we looked at 8 quality statements related to the themes of these concerns.
For those quality statements not assessed, we used the scores awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall score.
The overall rating for the service remains good, however, we identified shortfalls in some of the areas we assessed.
We have identified breaches of regulations in relation to risk management, staffing and good governance.
People's experience of the service
Updated
20 February 2024
During the assessment we spoke with 7 staff, including the management team. We sought feedback from 11 people who live at the service and 9 relatives.
People and relatives told us they felt safe living at the service and staff knew how to report concerns.
The service has systems in place to support people manage their risks and we found that most risks to people had been assessed, however the management of risks was inconsistent.
Medicines were not always managed safely for people living at the service.
People and their relatives were positive about the safety of the environment. Through our own observations, we identified that some improvement to the environment which were discussed with the management team. The service had a system in place to monitor risks related to the safety of the environment.
Systems to record staff training were in place, however there did not always robustly evidence if all staff were having their mandatory training or any additional training related to people’s specific needs.
People and their relatives told us they felt supported with their health, care and wellbeing needs and all permanent staff appeared to have a good knowledge of people’s needs and the care they needed. However, we identified that there was a clear lack of clinical leadership which meant it was not always possible to ensure important tasks had been carried out placing people at increased risk.
Systems to monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service were not always effective. Records to support the management of the service had not always been maintained. They did not always clearly evidence action taken or needing to be taken to improve the service. Records were not always used collaboratively to inform robust actions which could be taken to improve the service delivery and quality of care