CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Emerson House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines, infection control, staffing and risk assessments were generally managed safely, although some incidents involving staff injuries needed further review.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care plans were reviewed. Staff supported people with healthcare, nutrition, choices and least restrictive care, but inspectors recommended better checks on the quality, taste and nutritional content of meals.
- Caring?
- Good
- No separate rating was given in this report. Inspectors saw staff providing patient, person-centred support and helping people make choices about their daily lives.
- Responsive?
- Good
- No separate rating was given in this report. Care records reflected people's preferences and changing needs, and staff supported people to take part in activities, although reduced staffing had affected outings for some people.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had regular checks, open management and positive leadership. However, some care records were stored in different places and could not be found quickly.
What inspectors found, June 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, but improvements were needed to food quality and care-record storage.
This was an unannounced inspection on 12 May 2021. Two inspectors spoke with people and relatives, observed daily life, spoke with seven staff and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home supported eight adults with learning disabilities. Inspectors found people were safe, medicines were managed well and care records described people's needs. Staff supported people to make choices and live as independently as possible.
The inspection was prompted by concerns about care, health and safety, training, food and stimulation. Inspectors found no breaches, but recommended improvements to the quality and nutritional value of meals and to how care records were stored and accessed.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective and Well-led were also rated Good. These ratings were unchanged from the previous inspection, published on 12 February 2018.
Safe, skilled support
Inspectors saw staff supporting people safely and competently. Medicines were given safely, staff were trained and their skills were checked.
“We saw staff support people in safe and highly competent ways.” from the report
Choice and independence
People could choose how to spend their day, access all parts of the home and keep their rooms in ways that reflected their personalities.
“The Model of care and setting maximises people's choice, control and independence.” from the report
Person-centred care
Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. Relatives described staff as patient, kind and respectful of people's wishes.
“They don't just do things without involving him or us.” from the report
Positive leadership
Inspectors found clear leadership, quality checks and an open culture. The manager and staff showed a good understanding of people's needs.
“The registered manager and staff shared the provider's vision for providing high quality individualised care and support.” from the report
Meal quality
needs fixingSome meals were not enjoyed and staff gave mixed views about their taste and balance. Inspectors recommended a checking system to improve meals.
“However, staff said sometimes meals were not tasty and were not always well balanced.” from the report
Care records were hard to find
needs fixingSome records were kept in different places and could not be located quickly. Inspectors said this could create a risk if records were needed in an emergency.
“This could put people at risk if care records were needed in an emergency.” from the report
Fewer outings after staff left
needs fixingA reduction in full-time staff had affected how often people could go out. Agency staff were used and more staff were being recruited.
“Staff said this had impacted on how often people had been able to go out from the home.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to check the taste, balance and nutritional content of meals?
- 02How are care and treatment records now stored so staff can find them quickly in an emergency?
- 03Have staffing levels and the frequency of people's outings improved since the inspection?
- 04How are incidents in which staff are scratched or people may be harmed reviewed and reported?
- 05How do you make sure each person's choices, activities and changing needs are reflected in their care plan?
The report gives ratings for Safe, Effective and Well-led; it does not show separate ratings for Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 June 2021 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, February 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some care plan and feedback work still being completed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 18 January 2018. The home was registered for up to eight people with learning disabilities or mental health conditions. Five people were living there.
Inspectors met four people, spoke with staff and the registered manager, observed care, followed the care of two people, and checked records and quality monitoring systems. They found Good ratings in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
The report says people were protected from abuse, supported with medicines and health needs, and helped to make choices. Staff were described as kind and respectful. Care plans were personalised, activities matched people's interests, and the home was described as relaxed, informal and homely.
Safe medicines support
Inspectors found medicines were stored, recorded, given and disposed of safely. Staff explained medicines to people and checked that they were willing to take them.
“There were systems in place that helped ensure medicines were managed safely for people.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff used calm, gentle approaches when people were anxious or distressed. They respected people's choices, privacy, dignity and personal preferences.
“People were supported by staff who were kind and caring and sensitive to their needs.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans described how each person wanted to be supported. Staff understood preferences such as routines, food, clothing and personal care.
“Care plans and risk assessments were comprehensive and had been written in an easy to understand format.” from the report
Activities and community life
People chose individual social and therapeutic activities in the home and community. These included trips out, arts and crafts, music, quizzes and games.
“People were well supported to take part in a range of social and therapeutic activities in the home and the community.” from the report
Supportive leadership
Inspectors found an open management culture. Staff could share their views, received regular supervision and felt supported by the management team.
“The registered manager was open and inclusive and the home was run in the best interests of people who lived there.” from the report
Care plans had needed attention
needs fixingA quality audit had found that some care plans needed attention. The report says an action plan was put in place and the plans were then rewritten in detail.
“We saw that the seniors manager had identified care plans had required attention when they carried out an audit.” from the report
Feedback process was still developing
minorThe home was undertaking its first full survey of people's views, including views about staff, care, activities, menus and management. Ask to see the results and any resulting action plan.
“A senior manager told us they were in the process of undertaking the first full survey and reviews of people's views of the home and service provided.” from the report
- 01What changes were made after the audit found that some care plans needed attention?
- 02What were the results of the first full survey of people and families, and what action was taken?
- 03How would you support my relative's specific health, dietary, communication and personal care needs?
- 04How are activities chosen and changed when a person's interests or needs change?
- 05How do you check that medicines are given safely and that people understand or agree to take them?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including observations of care, two people's records, staff discussions and the home's quality monitoring systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 February 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 Emerson House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 December 2016.
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of South Gloucestershire
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 £1,020 to £1,280 a week. 32 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.