Progress made but care home still requires improvements

It fell short in four of the five key areas of the CQC’s report, published this month after an unannounced inspection on April 16 and 19.

But it was a better outcome on its previous inspection, in August 2017, when the service was rated ‘Inadequate’ and put in special measures.

The most recent report says Ersham House, in Ersham Road, ‘Requires Improvement’ in terms of safety, effectiveness, responsiveness and leadership.

It said the care home was not consistently safe. Although it was meeting the legal requirements it was previously in breach, practices need time to be developed and embedded, to ensure consistent safe care.

Risks to people, staff and others had been assessed and recorded. However, improvements were needed to ensure food and fluid charts were accurately completed and all risk to people’s health appropriately mitigated.

Ersham House was not consistently effective. While meeting the legal requirements that were previously in breach, further time was needed to ensure all staff had received the necessary training to meet people’s needs.

The report said the home was not consistently responsive. It was now meeting its legal requirements but there were areas that required further development and embedding into everyday care delivery.

Not all care plans had guidance for staff to follow if a person’s health needs change or if they were in need of end of life care.

Ersham House was not consistently well-led, said the report. There were effective systems for assessing, monitoring and developing the quality of the service being provided to people, but the CQC needed evidence that this has been sustained over time and when more people are admitted to the service.

The home was rated ‘Good’ when it came to caring. Staff communicated clearly with people in a caring and supportive manner, said the report. Staff knew people well and had good relationships with them.

People were treated with respect and dignity. Each person’s care plan was individualised. They included information about what was important to the individual and their preferences for staff support.

Staff interacted positively with people, who responded well to the good rapport which had been established.