CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Eliot House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, December 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with a small number of records and activity issues addressed.
Inspectors carried out an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 13 November 2018. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and other professionals. They observed care, checked care plans and medicines, and reviewed information about how the home was run.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable training, kind care and personalised support. People were supported with food, health needs, activities and end-of-life care.
The home was also rated Good at the previous inspection on 2 March 2016. This report says there was no evidence of serious risks or concerns and that the overall Good rating remained supported.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were administered safely, staff were trained and records were up to date.
“There were enough staff deployed on each shift to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and treated them with compassion, dignity and respect. They supported people to remain as independent as possible.
“People were treated with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs and were reviewed when circumstances changed. People were supported to follow interests and maintain important relationships and beliefs.
“People had a detailed set of care plans which were personalised to their needs.” from the report
Good management oversight
The manager was visible and approachable. Audits and feedback from people, relatives and staff were used to identify improvements.
“There were systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the services provided for people.” from the report
One decision was not clearly recorded
needs fixingA best-interest decision about a shared bedroom was not clearly recorded in the person's care file. The manager acknowledged this and corrected it during the inspection.
“One person had recently been admitted into a shared bedroom.” from the report
Outings had reduced
minorPeople and relatives said outings were less frequent because there were not enough staff to drive the mini-bus. The provider had made drivers available so regular outings could be planned again.
“Two people who lived in the home told us that outings were not as frequent as they used to be” from the report
Medicine interruptions were being addressed
minorThe manager was taking action to make medicine administration times fully protected from interruptions. The report does not say that medicines had been given unsafely.
“The registered manager told us they were taking action to support improvements such as ensuring medicine administration times were fully protected from any interruptions.” from the report
- 01How do you now protect medicine administration times from interruptions?
- 02How often are outings taking place now, and who drives the mini-bus?
- 03How are best-interest decisions recorded and checked for completeness?
- 04How are changes in people's care plans discussed with them and their relatives?
- 05How can residents and relatives raise concerns, and how are complaints followed up?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the overall Good rating carried over from the previous inspection on 2 March 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 December 2018 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 Eliot House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 January 2011.
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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Lincolnshire
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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.