Edenhurst Rest Home

People's experience of using this service: People were not always protected from the risk of an acquired health infection, as the service did not provide adequate handwashing facilities in all rooms. Staff did not always ensure the environment was clean. Although appropriate policies and procedures to monitor and reduce the risk of infection were in place these were not always followed

Systems were in place to support people to take their medicines safely, but these were not always followed. Staff did not always record and manage medicines prescribed 'as required' safely. Information recorded about people's allergies to medicines was contradictory.

Safe recruitment practices were in place but not always evidenced. Information regarding proof of identification and DBS checks was not present for all staff.

People felt safe and staff ensured that risks to their health and safety were reduced. We found that sufficient staff were deployed to safely meet people's needs. Staff had received training to ensure they had the knowledge to protect people from the risk of avoidable harm or abuse, whilst providing care.

Staff received relevant training and felt well supported. People were asked for their consent to their care and appropriate steps were taken to support people who lacked capacity to make decisions.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain good health.

There were positive and caring relationships between people using the service and the staff who cared for them. Staff promoted people's right to make their own decisions about their care where possible and respected the choices they made. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were treated with dignity and respect by staff who understood the importance of this.

People received person-centred and responsive care from staff who had a clear understanding of their current support needs. Care plans were in place, which provided information about the care people required.

People knew how to make a complaint and there was a clear complaints procedure in place. When people were at the end of their life the service had effective measures in place to support them and ensure their wishes and needs were met.

An open and transparent culture enabled people and staff to speak up if they wished to. The management team provided strong leadership and a clear direction to staff.

There were quality monitoring procedures in place but these were not always effective at identifying and responding to issues.

The management structure of the service was clear.

People's safety had been considered and risks had been reduced by the introduction of equipment or guidance. Staff had received training in relation to safeguarding and knew how to protect people from harm.

Information was provided in a range of formats to support understanding. People were able to access spiritual support to meet their religious beliefs.

There was a registered manager at the home and the rating from their previous inspection was displayed at the home and on their website. When required notifications were usually completed to inform us of events and incidents, this helped us the monitor the action the provider had taken.