Eastlake

The service is divided into four units. Each unit has its own lounge and dining area. There is a level communal garden for everyone to use.

There was a framework for risk management and control. However, this was inconsistently applied. Audits did not consistently identify shortfalls. There was an accident/incident reporting system, but this was not fully utilised. Underlying causes of incidents and accidents were not fully considered.

We identified some strengths in partnership working, particularly with visiting professionals, including GPs. On the other hand, there were weaknesses in communication so that care was more joined up. The provider had begun some work to make improvements.

People were supported to engage in home life and maintain contacts with family and friends. Local schools, and other members of the community were invited to chat and sing with people. People remarked on this, clearly appreciating the connection with different generations and their local community.

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 told us they felt safe living at the home. Relatives of people living at the home told us they felt their loved ones were safe.

Staff were recruited safely, and the relevant checks had been carried out on staff before they started work.

Staff we spoke with understood what constituted abuse and knew what actions to take if they felt someone

at the home was being abused. There was a safeguarding policy in place for the staff to refer to.

We observed the home as clean and well kept. We were assured that the provider was supporting people living at the service to minimise the spread of infection.