CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Edward House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and trusted staff. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, safeguarding arrangements, staffing, recruitment checks, medicines systems, infection control and incident reviews.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs, goals and preferences were assessed and reviewed. Staff had relevant training and supervision, and people were supported with food, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors observed respectful and compassionate care. People were involved in decisions, and staff respected privacy, dignity, equality, culture, communication needs and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and included people's backgrounds, preferences, needs and desired outcomes. People had activity programmes and support to maintain community, family and friendship links.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People and staff were positive about the management. Regular audits, meetings, reviews and a service improvement plan were used to monitor quality and safety.
What inspectors found, March 2020
Edward House Care Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, caring and well-managed support for people with mental health needs.
This was a planned, announced inspection on 13 February 2020. One inspector met all three people living in the home, spoke with two of them and observed care. The inspector also spoke with staff and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files, risk assessments, audits and other records.
The home supported up to three people with mental health needs. Inspectors found that people felt safe and trusted staff. Staff understood risks, safeguarding and medicines procedures. The home was clean, staffing was suitable, and accidents and incidents were recorded and reviewed.
People had individual care plans and were involved in decisions about their care. Staff supported people's communication, cultural needs, independence, healthcare and activities. Inspectors found kind and respectful relationships, and said the management and quality checks supported good care.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published on 15 August 2017.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they trusted staff and felt safe. Staff understood how to identify and report possible abuse.
“People told us they trusted the staff and felt the service was safe.” from the report
Safe medicines management
Inspectors found accurate medicines records and regular audits. Staff received regular medicines training and competency checks before administering medicines.
“We checked medicines and saw satisfactory and accurate records in relation to the receipt, storage, administration and disposal of medicines for each person.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, preferences, relationships, culture, emotional needs and desired outcomes. People were involved in decisions about their care.
“Everyone had an individual plan of care and support which was reviewed with them, on a regular basis.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people with respect and compassion. Staff supported people's dignity, privacy, equality and independence.
“We observed staff treating people with respect and compassion.” from the report
Good management oversight
People and staff spoke positively about the management. Regular audits and an improvement plan were used to monitor safety and quality.
“Records showed that audits took place on a regular basis to make sure the continued safety of both people using the service and the staff supporting them.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and manage my relative's particular mental health risks, and how often would their support plan be reviewed?
- 02How would you support my relative with their medicines, including reviews by healthcare professionals and checks that records remain accurate?
- 03How would you support my relative's communication, cultural or spiritual needs and preferred language?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available to my relative, and how would their interests be recorded?
- 05How would my relative be involved in decisions about their care and in meetings about how the home is run?
This was an announced inspection that assessed all five CQC questions and looked at both the premises and the care provided; the previous overall rating and all five question ratings were Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 March 2020 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, August 2017
Edward House Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a new manager still completing registration.
Inspectors visited on 18 July 2017. The visit was announced 48 hours in advance. They spoke with two people living there and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines, finances, staff records, training, safety checks and quality audits.
The home supported up to three adults with mental health conditions, with two people living there at the time. Inspectors found people felt safe and were treated with kindness and respect. Staff understood people's needs, supported their choices, helped them stay in contact with family and friends, and supported activities in the community.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection in May 2015.
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found safeguarding procedures, individual risk assessments, secure medicines storage and regular medicines checks. Staffing levels and recruitment checks were also considered safe.
“This meant people were receiving their medicines in a safe way.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff understood people's personalities, preferences and needs. Inspectors observed reassuring, friendly and respectful interactions.
“Throughout our visit we saw positive, caring interactions between staff and people using the service.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, preferences, communication needs, likes and dislikes. People were involved in planning and reviewing their care.
“The care plans were written in a person centred way that reflected people's individual preferences.” from the report
Choice and community life
People chose their food, daily routines and activities. They were supported to go shopping, attend appointments, visit others and take part in community activities.
“People were supported to engage in activities outside the home to ensure they were part of the local community.” from the report
Regular monitoring
The home used audits, surveys, staff meetings and external checks to monitor safety and quality. Inspectors found that identified actions were acted on.
“This meant people could be confident the quality of the service was being assessed and monitored so that improvements could be made where required.” from the report
No registered manager at the visit
minorThe home had been using an interim manager since September 2016. A new manager had started induction and the CQC registration process, but this was not complete at the inspection.
“The service did not have a registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01Has the new manager now completed registration with the CQC, and who is responsible for the home if that process is not complete?
- 02How will staff tailor support to my relative's mental health needs and any risks identified in their care plan?
- 03How are medicines checked and recorded each day, and how will you explain medicines to my relative?
- 04What activities and support in the local community would be available for my relative?
- 05How would my relative and our family be involved in reviewing the care plan and raising concerns?
This was an announced inspection covering all five quality areas; inspectors spoke with two people and reviewed two care files, so the findings relate to the service and the people present at that time. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 August 2017 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Edward House Care Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 November 2010.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Waltham Forest
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,200 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Sidonia is a first class live-in carer whose dedication and thoughtfulness made her stay a happy experience.”
“Charity would take Nan on holidays day trips and shopping adventures”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.